International  Relations  Club 


PRO 
PAIR  I A 

PER 

ORBIS 

CONCORDIAM 


Given  by  the 

Carnegie  Endowment 
for    International    Peace 

to  encourage  the  study  of 
international  relations 


IT-HA^Y 

•n  s  c 

•  t  "• 


Publications  of  the 

Carnegie  Endowment  for  International  Peace 
Division  of  International  Law 

Washington 


WAR  AND  PEACE: 


THE  EVILS  OF  THE  FIRST 

AND 

A  PLAN  FOR  PRESERVING  THE  LAST 


BY 

WILLIAM  JAY 


Reprinted  from  the  original  edition  of  1842 
with  an  introductory  note 

by 
JAMES  BROWN  SCOTT 

Director  of  the  Division  of  International  Law  of  the  Carnegie  Endowment 
for  International  Peace 


NEW  YORK 
OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

AMERICAN  BRANCH:  35  WMT  32ND  STREET 
LONDON,  TORONTO,  MELBOURNE.  AND  BOMBAY 

1919 


TX 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

In  1842  there  was  published  in  the  city  of  New  York,  a 
little  book  of  approximately  a  hundred  pages,  entitled 
"War  and  Peace :  the  Evils  of  the  First,  and  a  Plan  for  Pre- 
serving the  Last."  In  lieu  of  preface  or  introduction  the 
author  contented  himself  with  Dr.  Franklin's  oft  quoted 
dictum  and  outstanding  challenge  to  men  of  good  will, 
which  he  printed  on  the  title  page :  "We  make  daily  great 
Improvements  in  Natural,  there  is  one  I  wish  to  see  in 
Moral  Philosophy;  the  Discovery  of  a  Plan,  that  would 
induce  &  oblige  Nations  to  settle  their  Disputes  without 
first  Cutting  one  another's  Throats."* 

John  Jay  recommended  "a  plan"  to  the  Congress  in  1785, 
when  holding  the  position  of  Secretary  of  State  for  For- 
eign Aifairs  under  the  government  of  the  Confederation;! 
five  years  later,  John  Jay,  as  Acting  Secretary  of  State 
under  the  Constitution,  until  Jefferson's  return  from 
France  to  assume  the  Secretaryship  of  State,  recom- 
mended the  same  plan  to  the  first  President  of  the  United 
States,  who  sent  to  the  Senate  of  the  First  Congress  under 
the  Constitution^  Jay's  report  to  the  Congress  of  the  Con- 
federation. On  November  19,  1794,  John  Jay,  as  Envoy 
Extraordinary  and  Minister  Plenipotentiary  on  Special 

*  Letter  to  Dr.  Richard  Price,  February  6,  1780,  The  Writings  of 
Benjamin  Franklin,  collected  and  edited  by  Albert  Henry  Smyth, 
1906,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  9. 

f  For  Report  of  the  Secretary  for  Foreign  Affairs,  Respecting 
the  Eastern  Boundary,  dated  April  21,  1785,  see  American  State 
Papers,  Foreign  Relations,  Vol.  I,  p.  94. 

$  For  the  text  of  a  Message  from  the  President  of  the  United 
States  Relating  to  Differences  with  Great  Britain  Respecting  the 
Eastern  Boundary,  Communicated  February  9,  1790,  see  ibid.,  p.  90. 


IV  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

Mission  to  Great  Britain,  signed  the  first  treaty  under  the 
Constitution,  which  aptly  bears  his  name,  carrying  his 
plan  into  effect  of  submitting  to  mixed  commissions  the 
differences  between  Great  Britain  and  the  United  States, 
which  diplomacy  had  failed  to  adjust.  The  contribution 
of  John  Jay  to  his  friend  Franklin's  request  for  a  plan 
was  thus  the  introduction  of  arbitration  into  the  modern 
practice  of  nations. 

The  contribution  of  William  Jay,  the  author  of  the  trac- 
tate on  War  and  Peace,  rendered  the  plan  of  his  illus- 
trious father  effective  by  an  agreement,  to  be  included  in 
future  treaties,  not  to  resort  to  hostilities  but  to  submit  a 
controversy  arising  under  the  treaty  to  the  arbitration  of 
one  or  more  friendly  powers,  and  to  abide  by  the  award 

to  be  rendered  in  the  case. 

*  *  * 

The  treaty  of  September  3, 1783,  with  Great  Britain  rec- 
ognized the  independence  of  the  United  States,  but  the 
Northeastern  Boundary  as  defined  in  the  Second  Article 
thereof,  was  uncertain.  Therefore,  Jay,  appointed  Secre- 
tary of  State  upon  his  return  from  Paris,  where  he  had 
been  a  negotiator  of  the  treaty,  recommended  that  the 
matter  be  referred  to  our  Minister  at  London,  to  be  taken 
up  with  the  British  Government,  and,  because  of  failure  to 
reach  a  satisfactory  settlement  through  diplomatic  chan- 
nels, that  the  difference  be  submitted  to  a  mixed  commis- 
sion, whose  composition  he  stated  and  whose  procedure 
he  outlined  in  the  report  laid  before  the  Congress.  No 
action  was  taken  at  the  time  and  the  copy  of  the  report 
transmitted  to  the  Congress  five  years  later  met  a  similar 
fate. 

In  the  meantime  many  and  serious  causes  of  friction 
had  arisen  between  the  two  countries.  Contrary  to  Article 
IV  of  the  Treaty  of  1783,  impediments  had  been  interposed 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  V 

by  some  of  the  United  States  to  the  recovery  of  debts  due 
British  creditors,  and  the  Northwestern  Posts  had  not  been 
evacuated  by  British  troops  in  accordance  with  Article  VII 
of  the  same  Treaty.  Since  the  outbreak  of  the  wars  of  the 
French  Revolution,  British  vessels  had  seized  and  confis- 
cated American  vessels,  contrary  to  the  law  of  nations, 
and  in  some  instances  British  vessels  had  been  improperly 
taken  in  American  waters,  or  upon  the  High  Seas  by 
French  vessels  improperly  fitted  out  in  American  ports. 
Feeling  ran  high  on  both  sides;  the  two  countries  were 
rapidly  drifting  into  and  were  upon  the  verge  of  war 
when,  in  1794,  President  Washington  determined  as  a 
last  resource,  to  send  John  Jay,  first  Chief  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  on  Special  Mission  to  Great  Britain,  to 
attempt  an  adjustment  of  the  numerous  differences  and 
a  removal  of  the  many  and  perplexing  obstacles  to  peace. 
The  mission  was  not  of  Jay's  seeking,  nor  was  it  to  his 
liking.  "No  appointment  ever  operated  more  unpleasantly 
upon  me,"  he  said  in  a  letter  to  his  wife,  "but  the  public 
considerations  which  were  urged,  and  the  manner  in 
which  it  was  pressed,  strongly  impressed  me  with  a  con- 
viction that  to  refuse  it  would  be  to  desert  my  duty  for  the 
sake  of  my  ease  and  domestic  concerns  and  comforts."* 
He  had  previously  written  to  Mrs.  Jay:  "If  it  should  please 
God  to  make  me  instrumental  to  the  continuance  of  peace, 
and  in  preventing  the  effusion  of  blood  and  other  evils 
and  miseries  incident  to  war,  we  shall  both  have  reason  to 
rejoice."  And  in  language  which  betrays  the  man  and 
the  spirit  which  pervaded  his  every  thought  and  act,  he 
continued,  saying,  "Whatever  may  be  the  event,  the  en- 
deavour will  be  virtuous,  and  consequently  consolatory. 

*  William  Jay,  The  Life  and  Writings  of  John  Jay,  1833,  Vol. 
I,  p.  311;  The  Correspondence  and  Public  Papers  of  John  Jay, 
edited  by  Henry  P.  Johnston,  1893,  Vol.  IV,  p.  5. 


VI  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

Let  us  repose  unlimited  trust  in  our  Maker;  it  is  our  busi- 
ness to  adore  and  to  obey."* 

Reaching  England  in  June,  he  put  himself  into  immedi- 
ate communication  with  Lord  Grenville,  the  British  Sec- 
retary of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs,  and  beginning  with 
the  subjects  upon  which  agreement  seemed  likely,  then 
taking  up  the  more  delicate  and  difficult  matters,  and 
avoiding  written  communications,  inasmuch  as  "men  who 
sign  their  names  to  arguments,  seldom  retract,"  he  con- 
cluded a  treaty  on  November  19,  1794,  which  preserved 
peace  but  cost  him  his  career. 

By  Article  V  of  the  treaty,  the  river  intended  under  the 
name  of  the  St.  Croix  was  identified  by  commissioners 
appointed  in  accordance  with  its  terms;  the  commis- 
sioners appointed  under  the  6th  Article  failed  to  deter- 
mine the  sums  due  British  creditors,  but  their  government 
ultimately  accepted  the  sum  of  £600,000  offered  by  the 
United  States  in  satisfaction  of  their  demands;  and  the 
7th  and  most  important  Article  of  this  kind,  submitted 
to  a  mixed  commission  of  five  persons,  claims  of  Ameri- 
can and  British  merchants  for  the  alleged  illegal  capture 
of  vessels  and  wares  to  be  decided  "according  to  the 
merits  of  the  several  cases  and  to  justice,  equity,  and  the 
law  of  nations."  The  success  of  this  last  commission  was 
such  as  to  convince  the  two  countries  of  the  feasibility  of 
this  method  of  settlement,  as  it  has  since  convinced  all 
others  respecting  justice,  equity,  and  the  law  of  nations. 

It  was  fortunate  that  the  United  States  was  represented 
by  the  elder  Jay  in  the  entire  transaction;  it  was  fortunate 
that  the  younger  Pitt  was  Prime  Minister  of  Great  Britain 
throughout  the  same  period.  The  one  proposed  arbitra- 
tion, to  which  the  other  was  receptive,  and  if  in  1786  Pitt 

*  Jay,  The  Life  and  Writings  of  John  Jay,  Vol.  I,  p.  311 ;  John- 
ston, The  Correspondence  and  Public  Papers  of  John  Jay,  Vol.  IV, 
pp.  4-5. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  Vll 

was  unwilling  to  include  a  clause  to  that  effect  in  the 
treaty  of  that  year  with  France,  he  was  nevertheless  dis- 
posed in  the  treaty  with  the  United  States  to  follow  the 
advice  of  his  intimate  friend  and  confidant,  William 
Pulteney,  who  had  said  in  a  letter  addressed  to  him  under 
date  of  September  14,  1786: 

It  is  to  be  considered  whether  this  is  not  a  good 
opportunity  to  ingraft  upon  this  treaty  some  arrange- 
ment that  may  effectually  tend  to  prevent  future  wars, 
at  least  for  a  considerable  time.  Why  may  not  two 
nations  adopt,  what  individuals  often  adopt  who  have 
dealings  that  may  lead  to  disputes,  the  measure  of 
agreeing  beforehand  that  in  case  any  differences  shall 
happen  which  they  can  not  settle  amicably,  the  ques- 
tion shall  be  referred  to  arbitration?  The  matter  in 
dispute  is  seldom  of  much  real  consequence,  but  the 
point  of  honour  prevents  either  party  from  yielding, 
but  if  it  is  decided  by  third  parties,  each  may  be  con- 
tented. The  arbitrators  should  not  be  sovereign 
princes;  but  might  not  each  nation  name  three  judges, 
either  of  their  own  courts  of  law,  or  of  any  other 
country,  but  of  whom  the  opposite  nation  should 
choose  one,  and  these  two  hear  the  question  and  either 
determine  it  or  name  an  umpire — the  whole  proceed- 
ings to  be  in  writing?  This  would  occasion  the  mat- 
ter to  be  better  discussed  than  is  commonly  done,  and 
would  give  time  for  the  parties  to  cool  and  most 
probably  reconcile  them  to  the  decision,  whatever 
it  might  be. 

It  has  frequently  occurred  to  my  mind  that,  if 
France  and  England  understood  each  other,  the  world 
might  be  kept  in  peace  from  one  end  of  the  globe  to 
the  other.  And  why  may  they  not  understand  each 
other?  I  allow  that  France  is  the  most  intriguing 
nation  upon  earth;  that  they  are  restless  and  faith- 
less; but  is  it  impossible  to  show  them  that  every 
object  of  their  intrigue  may  be  better  assured  by  good 
faith  and  a  proper  intelligence  with  us,  and  might  we 


Vlll  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

not  arrange  everything  together  now  so  as  completely 
to  satisfy  both?* 

*         *         * 

Starting  from  the  premise  that  we  are  free  agents,  that 
war  is  an  evil,  [William  Jay  maintains  that  the  extinction 
of  other  evils  shows  that  war  itself  may  be  eliminated  by 
the  gradual  growth  of  a  public  opinion  against  it  and  by 
the  creation  of  agencies  which  nations  can  create  and  use 
just  as  individuals  have  created  and  used  them.  ] 

On  the  first  point  he  says  by  way  of  introduction: 

Civilization  and  Christianity  are  diffusing  their  in- 
fluence throughout  the  globe,  mitigating  the  sufferings 
and  multiplying  the  enjoyments  of  the  human  family. 
Free  institutions  are  taking  the  place  of  feudal  op- 
pressions; education  is  pouring  its  light  upon  minds 
hitherto  enveloped  in  all  the  darkness  of  ignorance; 
the  whole  system  of  slavery,  both  personal  and  polit- 
ical, is  undermined  by  public  opinion,  and  must  soon 
be  prostrated;  and  the  signs  of  the  times  assure  us, 
that  the  enormous  mass  of  crime  and  wretchedness, 
which  is  the  fruit  of  intemperance,  will  at  no  very 
remote  period  disappear  from  the  earth.f 

On  the  second  point  he  says,  also  by  way  of  introduc- 
tion: 

Individuals  possess  the  same  natural  right  of  self- 
defence,  as  nations,  but  the  organization  of  civil  so- 
ciety renders  its  exercise,  except  in  very  extreme 
cases,  unnecessary,  and  therefore  criminal.  A  citi- 
zen is  injured  in  his  person  or  property — were  he  to 
attempt  to  redress  his  wrong,  a  forcible  contest  would 
ensue,  and  as  the  result  would  be  uncertain,  the  injury 
he  had  already  sustained  might  be  greatly  aggravated. 
Instead  therefore  of  resorting  to  force,  he  appeals  to 
the  laws.  His  complaint  is  heard  by  an  impartial  tri- 

*  J.  Holland  Rose,  William  Pitt  and  National  Revival,  1911, 
p.  340. 

f  War  and  Peace,  pp.  76-77;  post,  pp.  51-52. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  IX 

bunal,  his  wrongs  are  redressed,  he  is  secured  from 
farther  injury,  and  the  peace  of  society  is  preserved.* 

He  admits,  as  he  and  as  we,  too,  must,  that  a  court  of 
nations  is  lacking,  although  expressing  the  opinion  that 
one  may  be  established,  saying:  "No  tribunal,  it  is  true, 
exists  for  the  decision  of  national  controversies;  but  it 
does  not,  therefore,  follow  that  none  can  be  established."! 

These  introductory  statements  have  been  quoted  as  they 
show  Mr.  Jay  to  be  as  sound  a  prophet  as  he  was  an  his- 
torian, and  the  following  passage  is  calculated  to  inspire 
confidence  in  his  judgment  as  a  man  of  affairs,  who  looks 
the  facts  in  the  face  and  who  proposes  to  reach  the  millen- 
nium by  degrees.  Thus  he  says : 

We  have  often  seen  extensive  national  alliances  for 
the  prosecution  of  war,  and  no  sufficient  reason  can 
be  assigned  why  such  alliances  might  not  also  be 
formed  for  the  preservation  of  peace.  It  is  obvious 
that  war  might  instantly  be  banished  from  Europe, 
would  its  nations  regard  themselves  as  members  of 
one  great  society,  and,  by  mutual  consent,  erect  a 
court  for  the  trial  and  decision  of  their  respective 
differences.! 

Such  a  transformation,  in  a  moment,  in  the  twinkling 
of  an  eye,  as  it  were,  he  admits  to  be  impossible 

since  time  would  be  necessary  to  enlighten  and  direct 
public  opinion,  and  produce  general  acquiescence  in 
the  plan,  as  well  as  to  arrange  the  various  stipulations 
and  guarantees  that  would  be  requisite.  It  is  not 
surprising  that  those  who  suppose  such  a  tribunal 
can  only  be  established  by  a  simultaneous  movement 
among  the  nations  who  are  to  continue  warring  with 
each  other  till  the  signal  is  given  for  universal  peace, 

*  War  and  Peace,  p.  77 ;  post,  p.  52. 
f  War  and  Peace,  p.  78;  post,  p.  52. 
f  War  and  Peace,  p.  78;  post,  pp.  52-53. 


X  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

should  be  startled  at  the  boldness  and  absurdity  of 
the  project.  Of  such  a  project  we  are  wholly  guilt- 
less. We  have  no  hope  or  expectation,  in  the  present 
state  of  the  world,  of  a  general  and  simultaneous 
negotiation  throughout  Christendom  in  behalf  of  a 
tribunal  for  the  decision  of  national  differences  and 
the  suppression  of  war.  Such  a  movement  can  only 
be  expected  after  an  extensive  although  partial  aban- 
donment of  the  military  policy;  and  must  be  de- 
manded and  effected  by  the  pacific  sentiments  of 
mankind.  We  have  no  hesitation,  therefore,  in  avow- 
ing our  belief,  that,  under  existing  circumstances,  the 
idea  of  a  congress  of  nations  for  the  extinction  of 
war,  is  utterly  chimerical.* 

The  difficulty  of  the  problem  did  not,  however,  deter  him; 
on  the  contrary,  it  rather  forced  him  to  urge  his  own 
country  to  take  a  first  step  in  the  hope  and  belief  that 
other  nations  would  be  drawn  into  the  movement  and  that 
a  foundation  would  be  laid  for  further  progress,  perhaps 
for  that  tribunal  between  nations  which  seemed  impos- 
sible at  the  moment 

The  step  in  advance  toward  the  ultimate  goal  was  to  be 
made  along  the  lines  of  least  resistance,  or  as  he  puts  it 
"in  the  way  least  likely  to  excite  alarm  and  opposition," 
inasmuch  as  in  efforts  "to  promote  the  temporal  or  spir- 
itual welfare  of  mankind,  we  ought  to  view  their  condi- 
tion as  it  really  is,  and  not  as  in  our  opinion  it  ought  to 
be — and  we  should  consult  expediency  as  far  as  we  can 
do  so,  without  compromising  principle."!  In  support  of 
these  eminently  sane  views  he  points  to  the  wisdom  of 
Wilberforce  and  his  followers  who  did  not  begin  with  the 
abolition  of  slavery,  on  which,  however,  they  were  set, 
but  contented  themselves  with  the  abolition  of  the  slave 

*  War  and  Peace,  pp.  78-79 ;  post,  p.   53. 
f  War  and  Peace,  p.  80 ;  post,  p.  54. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  XI 

trade  as  a  first  step  "being  well  assured  that  by  pursuing 
both  objects  at  the  same  time,  they  would  excite  a  com- 
bined opposition  that  would  prove  insurmountable.  .  .  . 
Had  the  British  abolitionists  employed  themselves  in  ad- 
dressing memorials  to  the  various  courts  of  Europe,  so- 
liciting them  to  unite  in  a  general  agreement  to  abandon 
the  traffic,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they  would  have 
labored  in  vain,  and  spent  their  strength  for  nought.  They 
adopted  the  wiser  plan  of  awakening  the  consciences,  and 
informing  the  understandings  of  their  countrymen,  and 
persuading  them  to  do  justice  and  love  mercy;  and  thus 
to  set  an  example  to  the  rest  of  Europe,  infinitely  more 
efficacious  than  all  the  arguments  and  remonstrances 
which  reason  and  eloquence  could  dictate."* 

Therefore  as  "a  mode  for  preserving  peace"  calculated 
to  "shock  no  prejudice"  and  to  "excite  no  reasonable 
alarm,"  he  proposed  to  insert  an  article  to  the  following 
effect,  in  our  next  treaty  with  France  "our  first  and  ancient 
ally"  with  which  no  rivalry  existed  in  commerce  or  manu- 
factures and  with  which  the  future  promised  to  be  har- 
monious : 

It  is  agreed  between  the  contracting  parties  that  if, 
unhappily,  any  controversy  shall  hereafter  arise  be- 
tween them  in  respect  to  the  true  meaning  and  inten- 
tion of  any  stipulation  in  this  present  treaty,  or  in 
respect  to  any  other  subject,  which  controversy  can 
not  be  satisfactorily  adjusted  by  negotiation,  neither 
party  shall  resort  to  hostilities  against  the  other;  but 
the  matter  in  dispute  shall,  by  a  special  convention,  be 
submitted  to  the  arbitrament  of  one  or  more  friendly 
powers;  and  the  parties  hereby  agree  to  abide  by  the 
award  which  may  be  given  in  pursuance  of  such  sub- 
mission.f 

*  War  and  Peace,  pp.  81,  97;  post,  pp.  54-55,  66. 
f  War  and  Peace,  pp.  81-82 ;  post,  p.  55. 


Xll  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

Neither  the  father  nor  the  son  claimed  his  particular 
plan  as  a  "discovery,"  but  each  has  been,  and  still  is,  the 
source  of  modern  precedent  and  practice.  In  the  present 
case  the  authority  of  Vattel,  the  master  in  such  matters, 
was  invoked  in  justification  of  the  plan,  who  showed  the 
feasibility  of  arbitration  by  the  experience  of  the  Swiss 
Cantons  over  a  period  of  centuries : 

Arbitration  is  a  method  very  reasonable,  very  con- 
formable to  the  law  of  nature,  in  determining  differ- 
ences that  do  not  directly  interest  the  safety  of  the 
nation.  Though  the  strict  right  may  be  mistaken  by 
the  arbitrator,  it  is  still  more  to  be  feared  that  it  will 
be  overwhelmed  by  the  fate  of  arms.  The  Swiss  have 
had  the  precaution  in  all  their  alliances  among  them- 
selves, and  even  in  those  they  have  contracted  with 
the  neighboring  powers,  to  agree  before  hand  on  the 
manner  in  which  their  disputes  were  to  be  submitted 
to  arbitrators  in  case  they  could  not  adjust  them  in 
an  amicable  manner.  This  wise  precaution  has  not 
a  little  contributed  to  maintain  the  Helvetic  Republic 
in  that  flourishing  state  which  secures  its  liberty  and 
renders  it  respectable  throughout  Europe.* 

A  mere  recommendation  to  resort  to  arbitration,  such 
as  is  contained  in  the  Peaceful  Settlement  Convention  of 
the  Hague  Conference,  would  not  have  satisfied  this  prac- 
tical reformer,  who  was  of  the  opinion  that  "there  is  too 
much  reason  to  fear  that  it  will  often  be  unheeded  by  the 
parties  to  a  controversy,  after  their  feelings  have  become 
irritated  and  their  passions  inflamed.  Something  more 
than  a  recommendation  is  wanted  to  prevent  a  national 
dispute  from  terminating  in  a  national  conflict."  And  he 
rightly  insisted  upon  a  definite  obligation,  saying,  "No 

*  War  and  Peace,  pp.  82-83 ;  post,  p.  56. 

The  passage  which  Jay  quotes  is  found  in  Book  II,  Chapter  18 
of  Vattel,  Le  Droit  des  Gens  ou  Principes  de  la  Loi  naturelle,  Vol. 
I,  p.  521,  of  the  original  French  edition  of  1758,  in  two  volumes. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE  Xlll 

plan  will  be  effectual  in  suppressing  war  that  does  not  in 
time  of  peace  and  good  will,  anticipate  future  differences, 
and  provide  for  their  accommodation."  Therefore,  the 
plan  which  he  proposed  was  of  this  character,  of  which 
he  felt  justified  in  saying,  that  "its  practicability  arises 
from  its  extreme  simplicity."* 

Each  treaty  containing  the  proposed  article  would  be 
an  incentive  to  further  treaties,  so  that  "before  long  some 
minor  states  would  commence  the  experiment,  and  the 
example  would  be  followed  by  others,"  justifying  the  hope 
and  the  belief  that  "in  time  these  treaties  would  be 
merged  in  more  extensive  alliances,  and  a  greater  num- 
ber of  umpires  would  be  selected."! 

Indeed,  it  was  not  "the  vain  hope  of  idle  credulity  that 
at  last  a  union  might  be  formed  of  every  Christian  nation 
for  guaranteeing  the  peace  of  Christendom,  by  establish- 
ing a  tribunal  for  the  adjustment  of  national  differences, 
and  by  preventing  all  forcible  resistance  to  its  decrees."f 

But  Mr.  Jay  did  not  feel  called  upon,  in  advocating  the 
first  step,  to  discourse  upon  the  measures  to  be  taken  in 
order  to  attain  the  final  result,  saying  expressly  that  it 
was  "unnecessary  to  discuss  the  character  and  powers 
with  which  such  a  tribunal  should  be  invested."!  He 
therefore  contented  himself  with  the  prophetic  statement 
that  "whenever  it  shall  be  seriously  desired,  but  little 
difficulty  will  be  experienced  in  placing  it  on  a  stable  and 
satisfactory  basis."f  And  his  conclusion  is  as  true  now  as 
then — for  Mr.  Jay,  not  merely  an  active  member  of  the 
American  Peace  Society  and  its  president  for  a  decade, 
but,  lawyer  by  training  and  judge  by  profession,  knew 
whereof  he  spoke :  "That  such  a  court,  formed  by  a  con- 

*  War  and  Peace,  pp.  89-90;  post,  p.  61. 
f  War  and  Peace,  p.  96 ;  post ,  p.  65. 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

gress  of  nations  in  obedience  to  the  general  wish,  would, 
next  to  Christianity,  be  the  richest  gift  ever  bestowed  by 
Heaven  upon  a  suffering  world,  will  scarcely  be  questioned 
by  any  who  have  patiently  and  candidly  investigated  the 

subject."* 

*  *  * 

The  little  book  carried  conviction  in  its  day  and  its  day 
is  not  yet  passed.  The  plan  which  he  advocated  has,  like 
that  of  his  father,  made  its  way  into  treaty  after  treaty, 
and  the  Article  he  advocated,  called  from  its  French  name 
the  clause  compromissoire  is  familiar  alike  to  the  ordinary 
diplomatist,  the  international  lawyer,  and  the  enlightened 
layman.  John  Jay's  actual  treaty  of  1794,  submitting 
specific  disputes  to  arbitration,  and  William  Jay's  pro- 
posed article  of  1842,  submitting  future  disputes  arising 
under  the  treaty  state  the  American  Policy  of  Washing- 
ton, the  Commander  in  Chief  in  the  war  which  made  us  a 
nation : 

In  my  opinion,  it  is  desirable  that  all  questions  be- 
tween this  and  other  nations  be  speedily  and  amica- 
ably  settled. 

And  together  they  point  the  way  to  the  American  vision 
of  Grant,  the  Commander  in  Chief  in  the  war  that  pre- 
served the  Union  of  Washington : 

I  look  forward  to  a  day  when  there  will  be  a  court 
established  that  shall  be  recognized  by  all  nations, 
which  will  take  into  consideration  all  differences  be- 
tween nations  and  settle  by  arbitration  or  decision  of 
such  court  these  questions. 

JAMES  BROWN  SCOTT. 
WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  July  9, 1918. 

*  War  and  Peace,  p.  96;  post,  p.  65. 


WAR  AND  PEACE: 


THE  EVILS  OF  THE  FIRST, 

AND 
A  PLAN  FOR  PRESERVING  THE  LAST. 


BY 

WILLIAM  JAY 


We  daily  make  great  improvements  in  natural,  there  is  one 
I  wish  to  see  in  moral  philosophy — the  discovery  of  a  plan 
that  would  induce  and  oblige  nations  to  settle  their  disputes 
without  first  cutting  one  another's  throats.  —  FRANKLIN 


NEW-YORK: 
WILEY  AND  PUTNAM,  161   BROADWAY 

1842 


*3  *WAR  AND  PEACE 


MORAL,  as  well  as  political  revolutions,  have  frequently 
owed  their  origin  to  causes,  and  been  accomplished  by 
agencies,  which,  to  human  vision,  appeared  utterly  pow- 
erless. 

Could  the  priests,  the  philosophers,  the  statesmen  of 
the  pagan  world  have  listened  to  the  command  of  the 
risen  Saviour  to  his  little  band  of  apostles,  to  teach  and 
baptize  all  nations,  their  indignation  at  the  presumption 
of  the  injunction  would  have  been  checked  by  their  con- 
tempt for  the  weak  and  ignorant  individuals  to  whom  it 
was  addressed. 

When  an  Augustinian  friar  declaimed  from  the  pulpit 

of  Wittemberg  against  the  sale  of  indulgences,  who  could 

have  anticipated  that  his  voice  was  to  rouse  a  sleep- 

*4        ing  world,  and  to  *  burst  the  cerements  in  which 

the  human  mind  had  for  ages  been  enveloped? 

But  without  recurring  to  former  times,  we  may  find  in 
our  own  striking  illustrations  of  our  remark.  Within 
the  last  forty  years  the  African  slave  trade  was  flourish- 
ing in  all  its  legalized  atrocity;  it  is  at  this  day  prohibited 
by  every  Christian  nation,  and  they  who  engage  in  it  are 
adjudged  infamous,  by  the  unanimous  verdict  of  the  civ- 
ilized world.  On  the  7th  July,  1783,  six  Quakers*  met  in 
London,  "to  consider  what  steps  they  should  take  for  the 
relief  and  liberation  of  the  negro  slaves  in  the  West  In- 

*  William  Dillwyn,  George  Harrison,  Samuel  H.  Hoare,  Thomas 
Knowles,  John  Lloyd,  and  Joseph  Woods.  Their  names  are  regis- 
tered in  heaven,  let  them  not  be  forgotten  on  earth. 


2  WAR  AND  PEACE 

dies,  and  for  the  discouragement  of  the  slave  trade  on 
the  coast  of  Africa." 

And  who  were  these  six  men  who  presumed  to  attempt 
the  abolition  of  slavery  and  the  slave  trade — who  aspired 
to  move  the  moral  world — to  arrest  the  commerce  of  na- 
tions— to  proclaim  liberty  to  the  captive,  and  the  opening 
of  the  prison  doors  to  them  that  were  bound?  Did  they 
sway  the  councils  or  lead  the  armies  of  Empires — were 
they  possessed  of  learning  to  command  the  attention  of 
the  wise  and  great,  or  of  eloquence  to  mould  to  their  will 

the  passions  of  the  multitude?  They  were  humble 
*  5  *  and  obscure  individuals,  belonging  to  a  small  and 

despised  sect,  and  precluded  by  their  religious  tenets 
from  all  political  influence.  But  they  had  discovered  from 
the  Book  of  God,  what  had  escaped  many  wise  and  good 
men,  that  slavery  was  opposed  to  the  attributes  and  pre- 
cepts of  the  Almighty  Ruler  of  nations.  In  laboring  there- 
fore for  its  suppression,  they  were  assured  of  his  protec- 
tion, and  without  regarding  their  own  weakness  or  the 
obstacles  before  them,  they  proceeded  calmly  and  steadily 
in  the  path  of  duty,  leaving  the  result  with  HIM,  with  whom 
all  things  are  possible.  These  humble  men  set  in  motion 
a  train  of  agencies  which,  in  1807,  accomplished  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  slave  trade  by  Great  Britain;  and  in  1830  com- 
pleted its  abolition  throughout  Christendom,  and  which, 
in  1838,  effected  the  liberation  of  the  negro  slaves  in  the 
British  possessions,  and  which,  in  all  human  probability, 
will  before  long  effect  it  throughout  "the  West  Indies." 

These  mighty  changes,  be  it  recollected,  have  been  ac- 
complished solely  by  the  exhibition  of  truth,  and  by  bold 
and  persevering  appeals  to  the  conscience  and  the  under- 
standing. No  miracle  has  wrought  conviction,  no  armies 
have  controlled  the  course  of  legislation;  no  blood  has 
soiled  these  glorious  triumphs  of  humanity. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  3 

*  6  *  But  we  live  in  an  age  of  moral  wonders,  and  be- 

hold on  every  side  of  us  confirmations  of  the 
promise,  "in  due  season  ye  shall  reap  if  ye  faint  not."  We 
are  at  this  moment  in  the  midst  of  a  revolution  perhaps 
not  less  extraordinary,  and  certainly  not  less  important  to 
human  happiness  than  the  one  to  which  we  have  just 
referred. 

But  lately,  a  vice  which  has  rendered  our  world  a  thea- 
tre of  crime  and  wretchedness  since  the  waters  of  the 
deluge  retired  from  its  surface,  was  spreading  desolation 
in  every  community  and  almost  in  every  family.  In  vain 
did  revelation  proclaim  that  the  drunkard  cannot  inherit 
the  Kingdom  of  Heaven — in  vain  did  example  teach  that 
degradation,  misery  and  death  were  the  attendants  oil 
this  terrific  vice.  It  invaded  every  station,  and  numbered 
its  victims  in  every  rank  and  department  of  society.  The 
palace  and  the  hut,  the  temple  and  the  prison,  the  crowded 
mart  and  the  sequestered  haunt  were  alike  the  scenes 
of  its  disgusting  triumphs.  In  this  fair  land  which  we 
would  fain  believe,  is  peculiarly  moral  and  enlightened, 
intemperance  has  inflicted  upon  us  two-thirds  of  our 
pauperism,  nine-tenths  of  our  crime,  and  an  annual  loss 

of  30,000  lives,  and  twelve  millions  of  dollars ! 

*  7  *  In  the  midst  of  this  moral  pestilence,  the  Ameri- 

can Temperance  Society  arose  with  healing  in  its 
wings.  Few  in  numbers,  with  no  hope  but  in  God,  with  no 
motive  but  love,  with  no  weapon  but  the  press,  its  members 
declared  war  against  this  potent  and  deadly  foe  to  human 
happiness.  The  wisdom  of  the  world  mocked  at  the  enter- 
prise, and  poured  ridicule  and  contempt  upon  its  authors. 
But  unmoved  by  obloquy,  undaunted  by  difficulties,  this 
little  band  of  philanthropists,  like  their  illustrious  prede- 
cessors in  the  conflict  with  slavery  and  the  slave  trade,  pro- 
ceeded to  arrest  the  public  attention  by  an  exhibition  of 


4  WAR  AND  PEACE 

facts,  and  to  influence  the  public  opinion  by  addresses  to 
the  understanding  and  the  conscience — and  what  results 
do  we  behold!  Thousands  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
our  citizens  have  abandoned  the  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors — to  an  extent  no  less  cheering  than  astonishing; 
the  use  of  those  liquors  has  become  vulgar  and  disrepu- 
table, and  is  daily  decreasing.  They  have  been  banished 
from  our  army,  and  nearly  so  from  our  navy,  and  are 
rapidly  disappearing  from  our  commercial  marine.  The 
wise  and  good,  the  powerful  and  influential  of  all  classes, 
are  arraying  themselves  against  the  fell  destroyer, 
*  8  and  the  victories  they  are  achieving  are  *  exciting 
the  admiration  and  stimulating  the  efforts  of  other 
nations.  Prussia,  England,  Ireland,  Scotland,  Sweden  and 
Saxony,  have  organized  their  temperance  societies;  and  we 
may  hope  that  within  twenty-four  years  from  the  forma- 
tion of  the  American  Society,  a  triumph  will  have  been 
gained  even  more  glorious  for  mankind,  than  that  which 
in  a  similar  period  was  acquired  over  the  slave  trade. 

After  these  splendid  and  blessed  results,  who  shall  pre- 
sume to  set  bounds  to  the  career  of  Christian  benevolence, 
or  to  specify  the  obstacles  which  are  insuperable  to  faith 
and  perseverance,  when  exercised  in  obedience  to  the  will 
of  God?  The  PRESS,  that  mighty  engine  for  good  or  evil, 
is  in  this  age  at  the  command  of  all  who  choose  to  wield 
it,  and  when  used  in  the  cause  of  truth  and  benevolence, 
continues,  as  in  the  instances  we  have  cited,  to  pro- 
duce effects  which  the  most  sanguine  imagination  dares 
scarcely  to  anticipate.  While  this  world  remains  a  state 
of  probation,  human  nature  with  all  its  powers  and  pro- 
pensities will  remain  unchanged;  but  its  powers  may  be 
developed  and  directed,  and  its  propensities  controlled 
by  the  influence  of  reason  and  religion. 

We  would  appeal   then   to   Christians,   to   philanthro 


WAR   AND   PEACE  5 

*  9       pists,  and  to  patriots,  and  ask  them,  if  *  there  is 

not  an  evil  under  which  humanity  is  groaning,  as 
great,  as  universal,  and  yet  as  surmountable  as  the  slave 
trade,  or  intemperance?  WAR  still  extends  his  bloody  scep- 
tre over  the  nations  of  the  earth,  and  is  still  dooming  count- 
less multitudes  to  wretchedness  and  slaughter.  And  shall 
we  not  rise  in  resistance  to  this  remorseless  tyrant,  and  may 
we  not  hope  at  least  to  curb  his  power,  if  we  do  not  over- 
turn his  throne?  Shall  we  shrink  from  the  effort,  in  re- 
membering how  many  ages  his  reign  has  endured — how 
powerful  an  alliance  he  has  formed  with  the  depraved 
passions  of  the  human  heart — how  many  millions  are  paid 
and  fed  and  clothed  for  supporting  his  authority,  and  how 
apparently  feeble  must  be  any  barrier  that  we  can  oppose 
to  his  cruel  despotism?  Let  us  recollect  the  anti-slavery 
societies  of  Great  Britain,  and  the  temperance  societies  of 
America,  and  believe  that  the  blessing  of  Heaven  may 
also  descend  upon  the  humble  labors  of  PEACE  SOCIETIES. 
But  it  may  be  said  that  in  regard  to  the  suppression  of 
the  slave  trade  and  intemperance,  success,  however  diffi- 
cult, was  seen  from  the  first  to  be  attainable,  and  hence 
exertion  was  invigorated  by  hope.  In  the  first  case  all 

that  was  wanting  was  a  majority  in  the  British  Par- 

*  10      *  liament,  and,  in  the  second,  the  practice  of  total 

abstinence  it  was  known  would  of  course  extermi- 
nate intemperance;  but  that  war,  being  the  consequence 
of  human  depravity,  must  necessarily  continue  till  the 
age  of  universal  righteousness  foretold  by  prophecy. 

Were  this  reasoning  sound  it  would  be  an  erroneous 
inference  from  it  that  we  were  released  from  all  obligation 
to  labor  for  the  peace  of  mankind,  because  we  were  as- 
sured that  wars  would  not  wholly  cease  before  the  mil- 
lenium.  The  corruption  of  human  nature  will  continue 
as  it  has  ever  done  to  produce  crime  and  misery,  but 


6  WAR  AND  PEACE 

are  we  therefore  to  make  no  effort  to  lessen  their  amount. 
Slavery  and  intemperance  are  as  directly  the  consequence 
of  human  depravity  as  war,  yet  it  is  now  obvious  to  all, 
that  they  are  not  necessary  and  irremovable  evils. 

Unhappily  the  great  mass  of  mankind  believe  that  the 
very  depravity  which  is  the  source  of  war  renders  it  at 
once  both  necessary  and  lawful;  and  that  the  preservation 
of  liberty,  property,  and  happiness,  depends  on  the  dis- 
position and  ability  to  oppose  a  forcible  resistance  to 
aggression.  So  imperfect  is  human  reason,  and  so  liable 
to  extraneous  influence,  that  the  currency  of  an  opinion 

too  often  affords  but  slender  evidence  of  its  truth. 
*  11          *  The  supposed  necessity  of  war  is  founded  on  the 

idea  that  however  much  we  may  deprecate  it,  it 
nevertheless  prevents  a  greater  evil  than  itself.  But  alas! 
few  have  any  just  conception  of  the  calamities  inflicted  by 
war,  and  fewer  still  have  ever  inquired  whether  the  evils 
it  is  intended  to  prevent  cannot  be  averted  by  other  means. 
In  deciding  how  far  war  is  really  necessary,  it  is  obviously 
important  that  we  should  first  ascertain  what  sacrifices 
it  exacts,  and  what  sufferings  it  occasions.  This  is  a  topic 
that  affords  an  ample  theme  for  fervid  declamation.  The 
horrors  of  the  battlefield,  the  confused  noise  of  the  war- 
rior, the  garments  rolled  in  blood,  the  shrieks  of  the 
wounded  and  the  dying,  the  groans  and  tears  of  widows 
and  of  orphans,  the  conflagration  of  cities  and  the  devasta- 
tion of  kingdoms  may  indeed  be  portrayed  with  such 
pathos  and  eloquence  as  to  cause  a  thrill  to  vibrate 
through  every  nerve.  But  the  impressions  thus  made  are 
transitory,  our  excited  emotions  soon  recover  their  wonted 
calmness,  and  the  understanding  and  conscience  being 
unenlightened,  remain  unaffected. 
Let  us  then  take  a  sober  and  unimpassioned  view  of 


WAR  AND  PEACE  7 

war,  not  as  it  existed  in  remote  antiquity,  when  whole 
nations  contended  in  arms,  and  the  soil  was  literally 

*  12     drenched  with  human  gore — *  when  no  quarter  was 

given  in  the  field — when  kings  and  princes  were 
chained  to  the  triumphal  car  of  the  victor,  and  their  sur- 
viving subjects  doomed  to  hopeless  slavery;  but  of  war  as 
it  exists  in  our  own  days,  and  as  waged  by  enlightened  and 
Christian  nations.  Passion  and  policy  have,  in  all  ages,  in- 
vested war  with  a  halo  of  glory  that  has  attracted  for  it  the 
idolatry  of  mankind;  be  it  our  endeavor  to  strip  it  of  its 
glittering  disguise,  and,  by  sober  arguments  and  undis- 
puted facts,  to  exhibit  it  in  its  loathsome  deformity. 

He  is  a  superficial  inquirer  who,  in  investigating  the 
evils  of  war,  confines  his  observation  to  the  scenes  and 
consequences  of  actual  hostility.  War  is  a  demon  whose 
malignant  influence  is  felt  at  all  times  and  in  all  places. 
Paradoxical  as  it  may  seem  in  the  very  midst  of  peace 
and  security,  it  is  blighting  the  labor  of  man,  adding 
weight  to  his  burdens,  and  laying  snares  for  his  virtue. 
Our  country  is  now  at  peace  with  all  the  world,  yet  are 
we  not  conscious  of  the  presence  of  the  Demon?  What 
means  that  periodical  military  display  which  is  ever  dis- 
turbing the  repose  of  our  most  retired  hamlets — what 
those  martial  titles  borne  by  such  multitudes  of  our  citi- 
zens— what  our  military  schools — our  widely  scat- 

*  13     tered  garrisons —  our   *   frigates   traversing  every 

ocean?  How  comes  it  that  a  million  and  a  half  of 
our  population  are  called  on  certain  days  from  their  homes 
to  be  instructed  in  the  art  of  slaughtering  their  fellow  men; 
and  that  millions  of  dollars  are  annually  subtracted  from 
the  earnings  of  labor  in  anticipation  of  future  conflicts? 
He  alone  who  will  estimate  the  treasures  expended  in  our 
military  preparations,  and  the  time  squandered,  and  the 
vice  engendered  by  our  militia  system,  will  have  some 


8  WAR  AND  PEACE 

adequate  idea  of  the  costly  sacrifice  yearly  offered  by  the 
United  States  on  the  altar  of  Moloch.* 

*  The  enrolled  militia  of  the  United  States  is  1,503,592.  This 
vast  multitude  are  called  from  their  homes  several  days  each  year 
for  the  purpose  of  inspection  and  drilling.  The  first  item  then 
of  the  expense  of  our  militia  system  is  the  annual  loss  to  the  coun- 
try of  many  millions  of  days'  labour.  But  this  multitude  must  be 
"armed  and  equipped  as  the  law  directs,"  and  hence  an  expendi- 
ture of  15  or  20  millions  more.  Next,  the  commissioned  officers 
must  be  arrayed  in  regimentals,  with  all  "the  pomp  and  circum- 
stance of  glorious  war."  Many  thousands  of  the  militia  are  more- 
over organized  in  "uniform  corps";  and  are,  of  course,  compelled 
to  provide  themselves  with  expensive  clothes  which  are  useless 
except  on  parade.  Next  comes  the  cost  of  music,  of  standards,  of 
artillery,  of  cavalry,  and  of  state  arsenals  and  magazines.  It  is 
impossible,  for  want  of  the  necessary  statistics,  to  ascertain  with 
precision  the  yearly  aggregate  expense  of  our  militia,  but  it  cer- 
tainly can  not  fall  much  if  any  short  of  fifty  millions. 

With  regard  to  the  military  expenditures  of  the  United  States 
we  can  speak  with  more  certainty ;  and  we  shall  be  scarcely  credited 
when  we  affirm  that  these  expenditures,  in  proportion  to  the  revenue 
of  the  country,  are  lavish  beyond  the  example  of  any  European 
power ! 

In  1838,  the  ordinary  revenue  was $24,309,299 

Payments  for  the  navy $6,403,551 

Do.  for  purposes  strictly  military, 

including  military  pensions.  ..  12,665,210 

-  19,068,761 
Here  we  have  an  expenditure  of  78  cents  for  every  dollar  of 

revenue  for  military  preparations. 

But  it  will  be  said  that  the  country  can  not  be  fairly  regarded  as 
at  peace  in  1838,  because  we  were  then  engaged  in  the  Florida  war, 
and  were  compelled  to  expend  millions  in  driving  from  the  Penin- 
sula a  few  hundred  Indians,  that  they  might  no  longer  harbor 
fugitive  slaves  from  the  plantations  of  Alabama  and  Georgia.  Be 
it  so;  let  us  then  turn  to  1833,  when  the  country  had  not  even  a 
savage  foe  in  arms. 

The  revenue  that  year  was $33,948,425 

Payments  for  the  naval  service $3,091,357 

Do.  for  purposes  strictly  military, 

including  military  pensions.  ..  10,342,746 

-  13,434,102 

This  gives  us  about  40  cents  for  every  dollar  of  revenue  spent  in 
preparing  for  war ! 

In  1 832  the  military  expenditures  of  France  were  34  cents  on  a 
dollar,  and  those  of  Great  Britain  in  1836  were  only  24  cents  on  a 


WAR  AND  PEACE  9 

*  14         *  Yet  this  sacrifice,  costly  as  it  is,  is  but  as  a  grain 
*15       of  incense  to  thousands  of  hecatombs  *  when  com- 
pared with  the  peace  establishments  of  Europe.* 

But  why  confine  our  views  to  our  own  country  and  to 
Europe?  The  southern  continent  of  America,  Africa,  and 
Asia,  all  teem  with  countless  multitudes  whose  trade  is 
blood. 

Would  we  know  the  cost  of  human  happiness  at  which 
this  mighty  machinery  of  war  is  constructed,  let  us  con- 
ceive the  results  of  an  equal  expenditure  of  treasure,  time, 
talents  and  physical  strength  in  the  peaceful  and  ordinary 
pursuits  of  life,  and  we  shall  then,  and  not  till  then,  be 
able  to  estimate  the  price  paid  by  the  world  for  being 
prepared  to  repel  aggression.  Were  the  millions  yearly 
lavished  by  our  country  in  military  preparation  devoted 
to  the  cause  of  science  and  religion,  to  the  facilities  of 
intercourse,  and  the  promotion  of  social  and  individual 
comfort,  an  amount  of  happiness  would  be  diffused 
through  our  land  that  would  cast  in  the  shade  all  our  past 
prosperity,  unexampled  as  it  has  been.  If  we  apply 

*  16     a  similar  supposition  to  *  Europe,  the  imagination  is 

dazzled  with  the  bright  and  blissful  visions  which 
instantly  rise  to  view.  The  revenue  of  the  Christian  states 
of  Europe  is  estimated  at  $823,000,000,  and  it  is  supposed 
that  at  least  one-half  of  this  prodigious  sum  is  expended 

dollar.  Wonderful  as  is  this  disparity,  it  is  greatly  increased  when 
we  remember  that  the  payments  by  France  and  England,  to  which 
we  have  referred,  are  the  total  payments  of  those  governments  for 
military  purposes,  while  to  the  similar  payments  by  the  federal 
government  are  to  be  added  the  expenditures  in  the  several  states 
on  account  of  the  militia. 

*  The  armies  of  Europe  (exclusive  of  the  Ottoman  empire) 
amounted  in  1828,  a  period  of  general  peace,  to  2,2(55,500  men. 
Balance  Politique  du  Globe,  by  M.  Adrien  Balbi. 

In  1840,  the  army  of  Russia  was  said  to  be 660,000 

of  France  330,000 

of  Great  Britain 114,000 


10  WAR  AND  PEACE 

during  peace  in  military  preparations,  and  in  the  payment 
of  war  debts.  And  is  it  a  matter  of  wonder  that  a  cry  of 
distress  is  resounding  through  the  eastern  continent,  and 
that  starving  multitudes  are  rising  in  resistance  to  the  con- 
stituted authorities,  when  labor  is  thus  robbed  of  its  earn- 
ings, without  receiving  in  return  the  smallest  addition  to 

its  comfort,  happiness,  or  virtue?* 

*  17  *  Free  institutions  are  called  for  in  expectation 
that  they  will  lighten  the  public  burdens;  but  in  vain 
will  nations  seek  for  prosperity  in  political  revolutions  so 
long  as  they  shall  trust  to  the  sword  for  peace  and  security. 
The  military  preparations  of  France  under  her  present 
monarch  are  far  more  onerous  than  under  the  arbitrary 
sway  of  his  predecessor;  and  the  people  are  complaining 
of  the  government  for  consequences  which  spring  directly 
from  their  own  military  mania. 

It  may  indeed  be  said  that  the  expenditures  caused  by 
war  ought  not  to  be  regarded  as  wasted,  since  they  afford 
employment  and  subsistence  to  vast  multitudes,  and  en- 
courage various  arts  and  trades.  True  it  is,  that  soldiers 
are  fed  and  clothed,  and  so  are  the  inmates  of  our  alms- 
houses  and  prisons;  but  surely  it  will  hardly  be  main- 

*  The  total  expenditure  of  Great  Britain  in  1836  was  £48,800,000. 
This  was  appropriated  as  follows,  viz.: — 

To  interest  on  national  debt £28,500,000 

To  army  and  navy 1 1,700,000 

To  civil  list 8,000,000 

It  thus  appears  that  of  every  dollar  of  expenditure  paid,  there 
were  on  account  of  the  debt,  which  is  strictly  a  legacy  of  former 

wars 58  cents 

On  account  of  the  army  and  navy 24 

82 

And  now  we  discover  the  astounding  fact,  that  of  the  multiplied  and 
grievous  taxes  under  which  the  people  of  England  are  groaning, 
82  cents  of  every  dollar  paid  into  the  national  coffer  are  offered  at 
the  shrine  of  war,  while  the  remaining  18  cents  are  sufficient  to 
support  the  splendor  of  the  throne,  and  to  provide  for  the  necessary 
expenses  of  government ! 


WAR  AND  PEACE  11 

lained  that  the  prosperity  of  the  whole  community  is 

advanced  by  compelling  one  portion  to  maintain  the  other. 

The  treasure  expended  in  equipping  and  supporting 

armies  is  not,  indeed,  annihilated,  but  the  labor  for  which 

it  is  given  as  an  equivalent  adds  nothing  to  the  wealth 

and  happiness  of  the  country,  and  is  therefore  useless. 

He  who  tills  the  soil,  or  produces  any  of  the  neces- 

*  18     saries  or  comforts  of  life,  not  only  maintains  *  him- 

self, but  contributes  to  the  general  stock,  whereas, 
he  who  fabricates  a  musket  for  government  is  supported 
at  public  expense,  while  the  result  of  his  labor  in  no  man- 
ner promotes  the  public  weal;  and  hence  the  community 
suffer,  first,  the  charge  of  his  maintenance,  and,  secondly, 
the  misapplication  of  his  time  and  skill.* 

These  considerations  lead  us  to  perceive  the  magnitude 
and  oppressive  weight  of  the  burden  imposed  on  the 
people  of  Europe  by  the  vastness  of  their  military  prepar- 
ations. It  is  not  so  much  the  amount  of  expenditure  as  the 
application  of  the  national  revenues  that  occasions  the 
complaints  wafted  to  us  on  every  eastern  breeze.  Patri- 
otic and  judicious  taxation  may  enrich  instead  of  im- 
poverishing a  nation.  The  canals  of  New- York  made  at 
a  cost  to  the  public  of  ten  millions  of  dollars,  have  con- 
ferred upon  the  people  of  that  state  an  amount  of  wealth 
and  convenience  which  no  political  economist  can  esti- 
mate; but  what  valuable  fruits  would  have  been  the  re- 
sult, had  this  money  been  expended  in  paying  some 

*  19     thousand  men  for  learning  the  *  manual  exercise; 

or  in  erecting  barracks  or  fortifications?  So,  also, 
the  large  sums  yearly  expended  by  the  state  in  diffusing 

*From  1803  to  1810,  the  British  Government  issued  1,680,000 
barrels  of  gunpowder,  and  3,227,715  muskets.  This  immense  man- 
ufactory gave  employment  unquestionably  to  a  large  number  of 
operatives ;  but,  independent  of  the  waste  of  the  material,  their 
labor  was  useless  to  the  public. 


12  WAR  AND  PEACE 

education  among  every  class  of  its  citizens  are  restored 
tenfold  to  the  people  in  rich  and  varied  blessings;  but  what 
comforts,  what  benefits,  are  derived  from  the  numerous 
and  onerous  trainings  of  the  New- York  militia,  and  the 
vice  and  drunkenness  and  idleness  which  attend  them? 
Were  the  two  millions  of  soldiers  in  Europe  dismissed 
to  productive  labor,  and  were  the  treasures  now  lavished 
in  preparing  for  war,  employed  in  elevating  the  moral 
and  intellectual  character  of  the  peasantry,  and  in  pro- 
moting the  happiness  of  all,  society  would  instantly  wear 
a  new  aspect — the  jealousy  now  subsisting  between  the 
ruler  and  the  subject  would  give  way  to  confidence — 
industry  and  enterprize  would  succeed  to  listlessness  and 
despair — poverty  would  be  exchanged  for  competency, 
and  the  human  faculties,  roused  into  action  by  education, 
and  stimulated  by  hope,  would  attain  the  greatest  per- 
fection allowed  to  man  by  his  Creator.  We  have  said  that 
the  malignant  influence  of  war  is  felt  in  the  very  midst  of 
peace;  and  surely  the  assertion  is  abundantly  verified  by 
the  facts  we  have  stated.  But  what  imagination  can 
*  20  conceive,  what  pen  portray  that  mass  *  of  wretched- 
ness, desolation  and  woe,  which  mankind  are  capa- 
ble of  accumulating,  when  all  their  malevolent  passions 
are  in  full  activity,  and  are  aided  by  the  resources  of  art 
and  science,  by  the  wealth  and  the  physical  strength  of  na- 
tions !  It  is  moreover  an  appalling  reflection  that  all  this 
wretchedness,  and  desolation  and  woe,  is  the  serious  and 
avowed  object  of  war,  a  means  to  an  end,  and  not  an  inci- 
dental and  lamented  consequence.  They  who  wage  war  de- 
sire and  intend  to  slay  their  enemies.  It  is  for  this  express 
purpose  men  are  hired  and  armed,  and  navies  equipped 
and  sent  to  sea.  The  greater  the  havoc  made  of  human 
life  and  happiness,  the  more  glorious  the  victory,  and  the 
more  successful  the  war.  It  is  also  well  understood  by 


WAR  AND  PEACE  13 

the  party  declaring  the  war,  that  his  own  country  and 
people  are  exposed  to  all  the  evils  he  is  endeavouring  to 
inflict  on  his  enemy — that  they  whom  he  employs  to 
slaughter,  may  themselves  be  slaughtered,  that  his  own 
cities  may  be  fired,  his  own  fields  ravaged. 

What  a  fearful  responsibility  is  involved  in  a  declara- 
tion of  war!    The  scriptures  abound  with  strong  expres- 
sions of  the  divine  abhorrence  of  murder;  and  with  what 
indignation  must  a  Being  of  infinite  benevolence  view  that 
enormous   mass   of  murder  perpetrated   in   war? 

*  21      *  Shall  the  blood  of  Abel  crying  from  the  ground 

bring  down  vengeance  upon  his  murderer,  and  shall 
not  the  blood  of  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands,  shed  to 
gratify  the  ambition  and  avarice  of  monarchs  or  senates, 
be  avenged  by  the  sovereign  Ruler  of  nations  ? 

That  wars  are  frequently  waged  from  the  same  lust  of 
plunder  that  actuates  the  highwayman  is  abundantly 
testified  by  the  whole  course  of  history;  and  it  is  unneces- 
sary to  prove  what  no  one  will  deny,  that  very  many  wars 
have  been  obviously  unjust,  and  therefore  highly  criminal. 
Our  object,  however,  is  to  show  that  every  war,  without 
exception,  involves  guilt,  and  must  be  offensive  to  the 
Deity.  To  effect  this  object  it  is  not  requisite  to  prove  that 
all  war  is  forbidden  by  scripture,  or  that  no  aggression, 
however  unprovoked,  and  however  dangerous,  can  justify 
a  forcible  resistance.  Nor  do  we  mean  to  deny  the  right 
of  self-defence,  nor  even  the  lawfulness  of  subduing  by 
force  of  arms,  when  necessary,  pirates  and  banditti;  and 
still  further  are  we  from  questioning  the  right  indispens- 
able to  the  very  existence  of  civil  government  of  enforcing 
obedience  to  the  laws.  When  we  say  that  every  war  with- 
out exception  involves  guilt,  we  mean  to  apply  the  remark 
to  war  as  it  actually  exists  between  nations  with  all 

*  22     its  *  usages  and  attending  circumstances.    It  may 


14  WAR  AND  PEACE 

be  possible  for  the  imagination  to  conceive  of  a  defen- 
sive war  commenced  in  the  spirit,  and  waged  in  accord- 
ance with  the  strictest  principles  of  Christianity;  but  we 
deny  that  profane  history  has  recorded  any  example  of 
such  a  war. 

When  we  recollect  the  vast  amount  of  human  misery 
necessarily  occasioned  by  war,  few  will  be  disposed  to 
question  that  a  resort  to  arms  must  always  be  criminal 
when  not  unavoidable.  Were  rulers  and  their  subjects 
mindful  of  the  tremendous  responsibility  incurred  by  the 
authors  of  a  war,  with  what  deep  and  trembling  solicitude 
would  the  question  of  peace  or  war  be  discussed — what 
numerous  expedients  and  sacrifices  would  be  proposed  to 
avert  the  necessity  of  mutual  slaughter,  and  with  what 
hesitation  and  grief  would  hostilities  be  at  last  com- 
menced? But  alas!  when  has  a  patient  and  conscientious 
inquiry  into  the  justice  and  necessity  of  a  war  preceded  its 
declaration?  Instead  of  calm  investigation,  and  equitable 
and  conciliatory  propositions,  we  have  lofty  demands, 
fierce  denunciations,  proud  references  to  our  own  strength, 
and  inflammatory  appeals  to  the  passions  of  the  populace. 
Pride,  revenge,  the  acquisition  of  territory,  or  some  sup- 
posed political  advantage,  are  in  general  the  true 
*  23  and  *  only  causes  of  an  offensive  war,  while  those 
set  forth  in  the  declaration  usually  aggravate  its 
guilt  by  the  addition  of  falsehood.  Nor  let  it  be  supposed 
that  the  sin  of  war  rests  only  on  the  party  by  whom  it  is 
commenced.  War  is  at  the  present  day  almost  invariably 
preceded  by  negotiation;  and  in  the  communications  of 
the  respective  parties,  we  seldom  discover  that  scrupulous 
regard  to  justice  and  moderation  which  a  desire  to  avoid 
hostilities  would  prompt.  Few  indeed  of  the  pretexts  as- 
signed for  a  war  would  even,  in  the  opinion  of  those  by 
whom  they  are  advanced,  justify  taking  the  life  of  a  single 


WAR  AND  PEACE  15 

individual  by  the  civil  magistrate;  and  yet  little  or  no  com- 
punction is  felt  in  commencing  a  contest  which  must  in- 
evitably prove  fatal  to  multitudes  of  unoffending  persons. 
The  guilt  of  the  crime  seems  lost  in  its  very  magnitude,  and 
he  who  would  shrink  from  taking  one  life  will  often  labor 
to  bring  about  a  war  in  which  he  knows  human  blood 
will  flow  in  torrents. 

A  cause  frequently  assigned  in  justification  of  war  is 

the  preservation  of  national  honor :  one  party  demands  a 

concession  as  due  to  his  honor,  and  the  other  refuses  it 

as  inconsistent  with  his,  and  thus  the  work  of  slaughter 

commences  for  a  sentiment — for  the  preservation 

*  24      *  of  a  character  which  probably  neither  merits  nor 

possesses. 

Sir  Robert  Peel,  the  present  Premier  of  Great  Britain, 
in  a  late  speech  to  his  constituents  remarked,  "I  do  hope 
that  neither  this  country  nor  the  United  States  will  be  mad 
enough  to  allow  a  difference  of  opinion  about  a  boundary 
to  set  them  in  a  hostile  position  towards  each  other.  Un- 
doubtedly it  is  necessary  for  each  country  to  maintain 
its  honor,  for  without  maintaining  its  honor,  no  country 
is  safe" 

Language  like  this  was  unworthy  the  character  and 
station  of  the  gentleman  who  used  it,  belonging  as  it  does, 
by  prescriptive  right,  to  bar-room  politicians  and  town- 
meeting  demagogues.  No  country  safe  without  maintain- 
ing its  honor!  Alas!  then,  for  Great  Britain,  for  at  the 
very  time  these  words  were  uttered  she  was  waging  against 
China  one  of  the  most  dishonorable  and  detestable  wars 
that  has  ever  stained  her  annals.  Indeed,  it  is  difficult  to 
point  to  a  war  recorded  in  history  waged  more  directly 
against  the  health,  morals  and  happiness  of  a  numerous 
people,  or  from  motives  more  basely  sordid,  than  the 
British  opium  war;  and  yet  he  who  is  now  the  prime  agent 


16  WAR  AND  PEACE 

and  director  of  this  war  talks  of  the  safety  of  Great 
*  25      *  Britain   as   resting   on   the   maintenance   of  her 
honor!* 

*  We  hare  used  strong  expressions  in  regard  to  this  war,  and  we 
have  used  them  deliberately,  not  only  from  a  thorough  conviction 
of  their  truth,  but  also  from  a  belief  that  it  is  the  duty  of  every 
friend  of  justice  and  humanity  to  bear  his  testimony  against  the 
cruel  and  heartless  conduct  of  the  British  government. 

The  assault  upon  China  affords,  moreover,  too  strong  and  apt  an 
illustration  of  the  evils  of  war  and  the  duty  of  preserving  peace,  to 
be  overlooked  in  the  present  treatise.  This  is  not  the  place  to  enter 
into  a  minute  exposition  of  the  iniquity  of  this  war,  and  of  the 
ravening  cupidity  of  those  who  conduct  it,  even  to  the  extorting  of 
millions  for  the  ransom  of  a  defenceless  city.  A  few  brief  facts  will 
suffice  to  explain  the  true,  although,  perhaps,  not  the  avowed  motives 
of  the  war.  The  British  East  India  contraband  trade  in  opium 
amounted  in  value  from  15  to  20  millions  of  dollars  yearly,  and 
yielded  an  annual  revenue  to  the  India  government  of  about  a 
million  and  a  half.  Hence  the  East  India  proprietors  have  strong 
pecuniary  inducements  for  poisoning  the  Chinese.  Now  the  late 
energetic  measures  of  the  Emperor  not  only  contemplated  the  entire 
stoppage  of  this  lucrative  trade  for  the  future,  but  occasioned  to 
the  East  India  smugglers  an  actual  present  loss  of  about  ten 
millions  of  dollars.  It  is  not  therefore  surprising  that  the  East 
India  interest,  both  at  home  and  abroad,  powerful  and  extensive  as 
it  is,  and  interwoven  with  the  wealth  and  aristocracy  of  the  nation, 
should  have  persuaded  the  ministry  of  the  absolute  necessity  of 
vindicating  British  honor,  of  placing  trade  with  China  on  a  secure 
basis  for  the  future,  and  of  bringing  the  insolent  barbarians  to  their 
senses. 

To  some  it  may  seem  paradoxical  that  the  same  government  which 
has  exhibited  such  a  sublime  devotion  to  the  rights  of  the  negro, 
should  be  so  utterly  callous  to  the  well-being  of  the  Chinese.  The 
solution  is  easy.  The  opium  war  is  a  government  measure  adopted 
by  politicians,  and  probably  with  the  expectation  of  receiving  politi- 
cal support  in  return  from  the  East  India  interest;  precisely  as 
certain  northern  members  in  congress,  in  obedience  to  southern  dic- 
tation, and  in  consideration  of  southern  votes,  trample  upon  the 
right  of  petition,  and  do  many  other  things  they  ought  not.  The 
abolition  of  slavery  and  the  slave  trade,  on  the  contrary,  so  far 
from  originating  with  the  government,  were  demanded  by  the  PEOPLK 
of  Great  Britain  in  a  voice  which  their  rulers  were  afraid  to  dis- 
regard. Mr.  Stanley,  one  of  the  ministry,  in  supporting  the  Eman- 
cipation Bill  in  the  House  of  Commons,  declared  that  so  loudly  was 
it  called  for  by  the  public,  that  no  ministry  could  retain  office  who 
refuted  it. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  17 

*  26         *  The  French   Republic,    the  terrific  progeny  of 

atheism  and  of  crime,  not  only  remained  safe  amid 
the  assaults  of  her  invaders,  but  turning  the  tide  of 

*  27     war,  she  poured  upon  Europe  a  deso  *  lating  flood 

which  threatened  to  engulph  every  throne  and 
every  altar.  The  power  of  the  republic  became  concen- 
trated in  Napoleon,  of  whose  extraordinary  character, 
honor  formed  no  element.  Yet  Napoleon  was  not  only 
safe  but  triumphant,  till  he  had  nearly  acquired  the  mas- 
tership of  Europe;  and  his  fall  was  occasioned  not  by  the 

loss  of  honor,  but  by  the  frosts  of  Russia. 

*  28         *  Perhaps  the  most  sublimated  wickedness  and 

baseness  in  degree,  although  limited  in  extent,  per- 
petrated by  any  civilized  government  at  the  present  day,  is 
practised  in  the  city  of  Washington.  There,  in  the  boasted 

To  vindicate  our  strictures  from  the  imputation  of  national  preju- 
dice, we  are  induced  to  add  a  few  very  brief  extracts  from  British 
publications,  and  from  the  proceedings  of  public  meetings  held  to 
remonstrate  against  this  government  war.  As  indicative  of  the 
sentiments  of  the  religious  community  in  England,  we  may  refer 
to  the  language  of  two  religious  periodicals,  the  first  belonging  to 
the  dissenting  interest,  the  other  to  the  established  church. 

The  Eclectic  Review,  speaking  of  the  "wholesale  confiscation  of 
opium,"  and  of  the  "breaking  up  of  the  haunts  of  respectable  British 
smugglers,"  declares,  "we  have  been  dealt  with  according  to  our 
deserts.  May  it  provoke  us  to  repentance  and  a  change  of  conduct." 

"If  we  must  have  war,"  says  the  Christian  Observer,  "it  ought 
to  be  for  a  more  honorable  object  than  that  of  indemnifying  smug- 
glers whose  contraband  goods  were  legally  seized  and  destroyed." 

At  a  public  meeting  held  in  London,  without  reference  to  party 
distinctions,  the  Earl  of  Stanhope  presiding,  the  following  resolu- 
tion, among  others,  was  past:  "Resolved,  that  this  meeting  deeply 
laments  that  the  moral  and  religious  feeling  of  the  country  should 
be  outraged,  the  character  of  Christianity  disgraced  in  the  eyes  of 
the  world,  and  this  kingdom  involved  in  war  with  upwards  of  three 
hundred  and  fifty  millions  of  people,  in  consequence  of  British 
subjects  introducing  opium  into  China,  in  direct  and  known  viola- 
tion of  the  laws  of  that  empire." 

The  celebrated  Campbell,  in  a  poetical  remonstrance  to  his  nation 
against  the  war,  after  allusions  to  her  former  glory,  thus  gives  vent 
to  his  indignation  at  her  present  baseness: — 


18  WAR  AND  PEACE 

citadel  of  American  liberty,  native  born  American  citizens 
are  seized  and  imprisoned  on  suspicion  of  being  fugitives 
from  bondage;  and  when  the  suspicion  is  disproved  by  the 
non-appearance  of  a  claimant,  the  prisoners  are  sold  as 
slaves  for  life  to  raise  money  to  pay  their  jail  fees!! 

Does  Sir  Robert  Peel  impute  the  capture  of  the  national 
metropolis  in  the  last  war  to  this  stain  on  its  honor,  or 
to  the  enterprise  and  valor  of  British  troops? 

It  would  be  madness,  the  Premier  tells  us,  for  the  two 
nations  to  go  to  war  about  the  boundary.  The  land  in 
dispute  is  not  worth  fighting  for;  but  self-preservation 
requires  each  nation  to  maintain  its  honor.  If  therefore 
either  party  insists  on  cutting  a  tree  on  the  wrong  side  of 
the  alleged  line;  or  should  a  silly  minister  think  it  ex- 
pedient to  display  his  patriotism  by  writing  a  blustering 
and  insulting  letter,  then  indeed  two  great  and  Christian 
nations  must,  for  very  safety,  commence  the  work  of 

human  butchery. 
*  29         Would  to  Heaven  this  rant  about  national  *  honor 

"And  all  thy  merchant  princes  swelled  the  cry 
That  the  vile  drug  must  sell,  though  nations  die — 
No  more  be  styled  the  empress  of  the  main, 
Who  strike  not  now  for  glory,  but  for  gain ; 
Pour  o'er  the  feeble  land  the  poison  flood, 
And  drive  the  guilty  bargain  home  with  blood." 

As  a  sample  of  the  spirit  in  which  this  war  is  carried  on  by  the 
invaders,  we  give,  in  conclusion,  an  extract  from  a  letter  by  an  eye 
witness,  relating  to  the  capture  of  the  island  of  Chusan,  on  the  5th 
of  July,  1840.  "Every  house  was  indiscriminately  broken  open, 
every  drawer  and  box  ransacked,  the  streets  strewed  with  frag- 
ments of  furniture,  pictures,  chairs,  tables,  grain  of  all  sorts,  &c., 
&c.  For  two  days  the  bodies  were  allowed  to  lay,  exposed  to  sight, 
where  they  fell.  The  plunder,  however,  was  carried  to  an  extreme; 
that  is  to  say,  did  not  cease  till  there  was  nothing  else  to  take,  and 
the  plunderers  will,  no  doubt,  be  able,  on  our  return  to  Calcutta,  to 
place  at  their  friends'  disposal,  and  for  the  ornamenting  their 
houses  trophies  gained,  not  from  the  Chinese  soldiers,  or  from  a 
field  of  battle,  but  from  the  harmless  and  peaceable  inhabitants  and 
tradesmen  of  a  city  doomed  to  destruction  by  our  men  of  war." 


WAR  AND  PEACE  19 

was  confined  to  those  who  are  now  at  the  point  of 
the  bayonet  easing  the  Chinese  of  their  purses.  But  we  also 
have  politicians  who  are  far  more  concerned  for  the  honor 
than  for  the  morality  of  the  nation;  and  these  gentlemen 
have  just  made  the  extraordinary  discovery,  that  the  honor 
of  the  Republic  requires  that  her  flag  shall  prove  an  aegis 
to  villains  of  all  nations,  who  may  think  proper  to  traffic 
in  human  flesh. 

In  1814,  the  United  States  bound  themselves  by  treaty 
with  Great  Britain,  to  use  their  "best  endeavours"  to  pro- 
mote the  entire  abolition  of  the  slave  trade — a  stipulation 
which  has  been  falsified  by  the  conduct  of  the  government 
from  the  date  of  the  treaty  to  the  present  hour.  Great 
Britain,  France,  Spain,  Portugal,  Belgium,  Holland,  Den- 
mark, Sweden,  the  Empire  of  Brazil,  and  the  South 
American  Republics  have  mutually  agreed  that  the  cruis- 
ers of  each  other  may  search  suspected  slavers,  bearing 
any  of  their  flags,  and  if  found  engaged  in  the  traffic,  to 
send  them  to  certain  ports  for  trial  and  condemnation. 
Russia,  dispensing  with  the  formality  of  a  treaty,  publishes 
an  ukase  virtually  giving  permission  to  the  cruisers  of  all 
nations  to  do  what  they  please  with  any  slaver  who  dares 
to  dishonor  the  Russian  flag.  But  the  United 
*  30  *  States,  so  far  from  joining  this  league  of  Christen- 
dom against  an  accursed  traffic,  now  aim  at  render- 
ing it  nugatory,  by  insisting  that  the  star-spangled  banner 
shall  protect,  even  from  visitation,  every  slaver  above 
whose  deck  it  may  be  unfurled !  In  vain  does  Great  Britain 
protest  that  she  claims  no  right  to  interfere  with  American 
slavers;  but  inasmuch  as  they  are  the  only  privileged  ones 
on  the  ocean,  and  as  it  is  a  matter  of  public  notoriety  that 
slavers  of  other  nations  seek  safety  in  carrying  the  flag  of 
the  republic  at  their  mast  head,  she  does  claim  the  right 
to  ascertain  whether  a  suspected  slaver  displaying  the 


20  WAR  AND  PEACE 

of  every  American  cruiser  to  ascertain  in  like  manner 
the  national  character  of  any  vessel  bearing  the  British 
flag.  In  vain  does  every  maritime  power  in  Europe,  and 
all,  with  one  exception  in  America,  accord  to  all  others 
the  same  right.  The  great  slave-holding  Republic  is  too 
jealous  of  her  honor,  to  permit  an  inquiry  to  be  made  into 
the  nationality  of  any  vessel  from  whose  mast  the  stars 
and  stripes  are  streaming,  although  that  vessel 
*31  should  be  a  Chinese  junk.*  *  Let  the  slave  trade 
revive  in  all  its  unutterable  horrors — let  thousands 
and  ten  thousands  of  human  beings  be  consigned  to 
wretchedness  and  death,  but  let  not  a  vessel  carrying  a 
piece  of  bunting  with  certain  devices  be  required  to  show 
her  papers  under  the  penalty  of  WAR. 

Such  is  national  honor,  the  safeguard  of  nations,  and, 
for  the  maintenance  of  which,  national  slaughter  is  in- 
dispensable ! 

But  whether  the  contest  be  for  national  honor,  or  for 
some  less  intangible  and  imaginative  object,  still  it  should 
be  recollected  that  a  party,  in  declaring  war,  is  acting 
as  judge  in  his  own  cause,  and  is,  therefore,  liable  to  all 
the  bias  and  prejudice  which  passion  and  interest  are 
ever  prone  to  exert  over  the  frailty  of  our  nature.  Surely 
there  is  danger,  lest  a  government,  in  deciding  on  its  own 
rights,  and  even  on  its  honor,  may  not  always  judge 

*  The  American  government  vainly  attempts  to  avoid  this  ab- 
surdity by  disclaiming  any  desire  that  their  flag  should  exempt 
foreign  vessels  from  visitation,  but,  at  the  same  time,  it  insists  that 
to  board  an  American  vessel,  bearing  the  American  flag,  and  to  re- 
quire a  sight  of  her  papers,  is  an  indignity  that  can  not,  and  will  not, 
be  borne.  Now  it  unfortunately  omits  to  point  out  by  what  natural 
or  nautical  magic  a  cruiser  can  ascertain,  without  boarding,  whether 
a  slaver,  carrying  the  republican  flag,  belongs  to  American  or 
Spanish  scoundrels.  When  reminded  that  such  a  rule  must  give 
entire  impunity  to  the  slave  trade,  it  cooly  replies,  "This  may  be 
deplored,  but  can  not  be  avoided." — See  Mr.  Stevenson's  letter  to 
Lord  Aberdeen,  October  21,  1841. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  21 

righteous  judgment;  and  may,  in  a  moment  of  irri- 

*  32     tation  and  passion,  not  *  only  invade  the  rights  of 

others,  but  hazard  the  peace,  security,  and  happi- 
ness of  its  own  citizens.  A  recent  occurrence  forcibly 
illustrates  the  justice  of  this  remark. 

An  American  slaver,  named  the  Creole,  "well  manned 
and  provided  in  every  respect,  and  equipped  for  carrying 
slaves,"*  sailed  from  Virginia  for  New-Orleans  on  the  30th 
October,  1841,  with  a  cargo  of  135  slaves.  When  eight  days 
out,  a  portion  of  the  slaves,  under  the  direction  of  one 
of  their  number  named  MADISON  WASHINGTON,  succeeded, 
after  a  slight  struggle,  in  gaining  the  command  of  the 
vessel.  The  sagacity,  bravery,  and  humanity  of  this  man, 
do  honor  to  his  name,  and,  but  for  his  complexion,  would 
excite  universal  admiration.  Of  the  twelve  white  men 
employed  on  board  the  "well-manned"  slaver,  only  one 
fell  a  victim  to  their  atrocious  business.  This  man,  after 
discharging  his  musket  at  the  negroes,  rushed  forward 
with  a  handspike,  which,  in  the  darkness  of  the  evening, 
they  mistook  for  another  musket — he  was  stabbed  with  a 
bowie  knife  wrested  from  the  captain.  Two  of  the  sailors 

were  wounded,  and  "their  wounds  were  dressed  by 

*  33     the  negroes."   *  The  captain  was  also  injured,  and 

he  "was  put  into  the  forehold  and  his  wounds 
dressed;"  and  his  wife,  child  and  niece,  were  unmolested. 
It  does  not  appear  that  the  blacks  committed  a  single  act 
of  robbery,  or  treated  their  captives  with  the  slightest  un- 
necessary harshness;  and  they  declared  at  the  time,  "that 
all  they  had  done  was  for  their  freedom." 

The  vessel  was  carried  into  Nassau,  and  the  British 
authorities  at  that  place  refused  to  consign  the  liberated 

*  The  very  words  used  in  a  protest  made  by  five  of  the  slaver's 
crew,  at  New-Orleans,  7th  Dec.,  1841.  The  facts  given  above  are 
taken  from  the  protest. 


22  WAR  AND  PEACE 

slaves  again  to  bondage,  or  even  to  surrender  the  "muti- 
neers and  murderers"  to  perish  on  southern  gibbets. 

Admitting  Madison  Washington  and  his  associates  to 
be  murderers,  do  the  laws  of  nations  require  the  surrender 
of  murderers?  To  this  question  the  American  government 
has  returned  an  emphatic  answer:  first,  by  making  the 
mutual  surrender  of  murderers  an  article  of  the  treaty 
concluded  with  Great  Britain  in  1794,  and  in  constantly 
refusing,  since  the  expiration  of  that  treaty,  to  surrender 
murderers  when  requested  to  do  so  by  the  British  authori- 
ties. Hence  it  is  obvious  that  the  refusal  of  Great  Britain 
to  surrender  murderers  to  us  cannot  be  a  just  cause  for 
war. 

But  these  slaves,  after  breaking  their  bonds,  took 
*  34  refuge  in  the  British  dominions,  and  hence  *  arises 
the  question,  do  the  laws  of  nations  require  the  sur- 
render of  fugitive  slaves  ?  This  question,  also,  our  govern- 
ment has  itself  answered,  and  of  course  must  be  estopped 
in  its  claims  by  that  answer.  Some  years  since  our  minis- 
ter in  England  was  instructed  to  propose  a  treaty  stipula- 
tion, whereby  the  British  government  should  agree  to  sur- 
render all  the  slaves  who  might  take  refuge  in  Canada,  we 
offering,  in  consideration,  and  on  condition  of  such  agree- 
ment, to  surrender  such  slaves  as  might  escape  to  our 
shores  from  the  British  West  India  Islands.  We  also  en- 
deavored, but  in  vain,  to  induce  Mexico  to  enter  into  a 
treaty  stipulation  to  restore  our  fugitive  slaves.  Should  a 
ship  load  of  fugitive  slaves  from  Martinique,  arrive  in 
New- York,  there  is  no  authority  known  to  the  constitu- 
tion or  laws  that  could  surrender  them. 

Bearing  in  mind  the  facts  we  have  detailed,  we  may  now 
form  an  opinion  how  far  the  judgment  the  slave-holding 
members  of  the  United  States'  senate  are  prepared  to 
render  in  the  case  of  the  Creole  is  impartial,  and  dispas- 


WAR  AND  PEACE  23 

sionate,  and  consistent  with  wisdom  and  justice.     The 
subject  was  incidentally  brought  before  the  senate  on 
the  22d  December. 

*  35         MR.  KING,  of  Alabama,  said,  "If  such  out  *  rages 

continued  he  solemnly  believed  nothing  could  pre- 
vent a  collision — unless  that  the  government  [Great 
Britain]  should  retrace  her  steps  WAR  must  inevitably 
come." 

Mr.  GALHOUN,  of  South  Carolina,  held  the  liberation  of 
the  slaves  of  the  Creole  "to  be  the  most  ATROCIOUS  OUTRAGE 
ever  perpetrated  on  the  American  people.  As  soon  as 
they  could  get  full  information,  they  ought  to  demand  that 
those  who  committed  the  piracy  should  be  delivered  to 
this  government.  If  we  cannot  obtain  justice,  every  man 
with  an  American  heart  will  be  ready  to  raise  his  hand 
against  oppression!!" 

Mr.  BARROW,  of  Louisiana,  "was  not  willing  that  those 
he  represented  should  submit  any  longer  to  the  insolence 
of  a  foreign  power.  He  wished  the  committee  to  present 
to  the  people  the  true  principles  of  national  law,  which 
we  would  maintain  at  all  hazards.  The  people  of  the 
South  would  not  submit  to  British  interpretation  of  the 
laws  of  nations,  drawing  a  distinction  between  slaves  and 
goods.  The  transfer  of  slaves  from  one  state  to  another 
is  a  matter  of  every-day  occurrence,  and  if  these  con- 
temptible British  subjects  of  Nassau  are  permitted  to  go 
on  in  this  way,  seizing  by  force  of  arms,  and  liberating 
slaves  belonging  to  American  citizens,  the  South 

*  36     would  be  compelled  to  *  fit  out  armaments,  and 

destroy  Nassau  and  other  British  towns  that  trample 
on  the  laws  of  nations  and  the  rights  of  our  citizens." 

And  are  men,  in  whom  the  moral  sense  is  so  perverted 
by  interest  as  to  regard  Madison  Washington  a  pirate,  and 
who,  although  vindicating  the  conversion  of  millions  of 


24  WAR  AND  PEACE 

their  fellow  countrymen  into  beasts  of  burden,  can  yet 
declaim  about  "oppression,"  fit  to  decide  questions  involv- 
ing the  rights  of  man?  Again,  we  ask  in  sober  earnestness, 
is  it  prudent,  is  it  safe,  that  men  so  blinded  with  passion 
as  to  talk  of  the  slave  holders  fitting  out  expeditions  to 
destroy  the  towns  of  the  West  Indies,  when  it  is  well 
known  a  mighty  army  of  black  soldiers  is  ready  to 
reciprocate  the  visit,  and  to  plant  the  standard  of  emanci- 
pation in  the  cotton  fields  of  the  South,  should  be  entrusted 
with  the  awful  power  of  kindling  a  conflagration  which 
would  consume  their  own  homesteads,  spread  terror  and 
desolation  through  a  large  portion  of  our  country,  and  be 

finally  quenched  only  in  the  blood  of  multitudes?* 
*  37  *  If  we  have  reason  to  believe  that  rulers  too  seldom 

inquire  into  the  justice  of  the  wars  they  wage,  we  are 
morally  certain  that  by  their  armies,  the  question  neither 

*  These  gentlemen  in  their  wrath  seem  to  have  forgotten  the  fol- 
lowing significant  hints  they  had  received  only  a  few  days  previous, 
from  the  war  and  navy  departments. 

"The  works  intended  for  the  more  remote  Southern  portions  of 
our  territory  particularly  require  attention.  Indications  are  already 
made  of  designs  of  the  worst  character  against  that  region  in  the 
event  of  hostilities,  from  a  certain  quarter,  to  which  we  can  not  be 
insensible."  Report  of  Sec.  of  War,  Dec.  1. 

"A  war  between  the  United  States  and  any  considerable  mari- 
time power  would  not  be  conducted  at  this  day,  as  it  would  have 
been  twenty  years  ago.  The  first  blow  would  be  struck  at  us, 
through  our  institutions.  No  nation,  it  is  presumed,  would  expect 
to  be  successful  over  us  for  any  length  of  time  in  a  fair  contest 
of  arms  on  our  own  soil;  and  no  wise  nation  would  attempt  it.  A 
more  promising  expedient  would  be  sought  in  arraying  what  are 
supposed  to  be  the  hostile  elements  of  our  social  system  against 
one  another.  An  enemy  so  disposed,  and  free  to  land  upon  any 
part  of  our  soil  which  might  promise  success  to  the  enterprise,  would 
be  armed  with  a  fourfold  power  of  annoyance.  Of  the  ultimate  re- 
sult of  such  incursions  we  have  no  reason  to  be  afraid,  (?)  but 
even  in  the  best  event,  war  upon  our  own  soil  would  be  the  more 
expensive,  the  more  embarrassing  and  the  more  horrible  in  its 
effects,  by  compelling  us  at  the  same  time  to  oppose  an  enemy  in 
the  field,  and  to  guard  against  attempts  to  subvert  our  social  system." 
Report  of  Sec.  of  the  Navy,  Dec.  4. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  25 

is  nor  can  be  understood.  Of  the  multitudes  hired  to  kill 
their  fellow  men,  how  few  have  the  capacity  or  inclination 
to  examine  the  merits  of  national  differences,  the  means 
used  to  settle  them,  or  the  necessity  and  morality  of  the 
contest  in  which  they  are  employed?  Armies  we  know 
are  usually  raised  by  voluntary  enlistment,  and  can 
it  be  agreeable  to  the  will  of  the  Holy  and  all- 
*  38  *  merciful  God,  that  his  intelligent  and  accountable 
creatures  should,  from  mercenary  motives,  engage 
in  the  work  of  human  destruction,  wholly  ignorant  and 
wholly  regardless  of  the  justice  and  necessity  of  the  act? 

In  almost  every  army  there  are  foreign  adventurers  who 
have  no  national  interest  whatever  in  the  pending  contest 
— men  who  have  taken  arms  from  no  sentiment  of  patriot- 
ism or  justice,  but  solely  for  their  wages,  which,  in  such 
a  case,  are  literally  the  price  of  blood. 

To  such  men  the  war  in  which  they  are  fighting,  is  and 
must  be  unjust.  They  are  hired  to  kill  men  who  have 
injured  neither  them  nor  their  country,  and  against  whom 
they  have  no  cause  of  complaint. 

It  not  unfrequently  happens  that  these  mercenaries  are 
engaged  on  opposite  sides,  and  are  thus  brought  into 
mortal  conflict  with  each  other.  In  the  late  disgusting 
strife  in  Portugal,  Englishmen  were  arrayed  against 
Englishmen,  and  Frenchmen  against  Frenchmen.*  If 

*  In  July,  1833,  two  hundred  and  fifty  English  sailors  who  had 
enlisted  for  the  service  of  Don  Miguel,  were  discharged  without 
leaving  England  in  consequence  of  the  news  of  the  victory  obtained 
by  Captain  Napier,  (English,)  in  the  service  of  Don  Pedro,  over 
Don  Miguel's  fleet.  The  boatswain  headed  a  deputation  sent  to  the 
Lord  Mayor  by  the  discharged  sailors  to  ask  for  redress.  That 
magistrate  inquired  if  they  were  aware  they  had  been  enlisted  to 
fight  against  their  own  countrymen,  who  were  serving  under  Don 
Pedro.  The  reply  was  in  the  affirmative.  His  Lordship  then  re- 
marked, "as  you  make  such  a  pounds,  shillings,  and  pence  affair  of 
it,  perhaps  you  have  no  objection  to  fight  for  Don  Pedro."-  -"If  we 
are  well  paid  for  it,"  replied  the  boatswain,  "it  does  not  signify 
whom  we  fight  for." 


26  WAR  AND  PEACE 

*  39     the  con  *  duct  of  such  men  be  sinful,  can  they  who 

employ  and  pay  them  be  innocent? — and  yet  what 
belligerent  ever  refused  the  aid  of  mercenaries? 

Another  revolting  practice  in  war,  is  that  of  encourag- 
ing deserters.  In  every  campaign  there  is  an  interchange 
of  these  men,  and  wretches  covered  with  treason  and 
perjury  are  cordially  welcomed,  and  arms  are  put  into 
their  hands  to  murder  their  late  associates  and  fellow 
countrymen. 

It  is  a  fundamental  law  of  the  Divine  economy  that  sin 
shall  be  punished,  although  in  regard  to  individuals,  this 
law  is  fully  executed  only  in  another  state  of  being:  yet  as 
in  that  state  nations  do  not  exist,  their  punishment  is 
inflicted  here.  Hence  every  war,  without  exception,  brings 
with  it  its  own  retribution,  and  this  retribution  is  wholly 
independent  of  the  final  result,  being  experienced  by  the 

victor  as  well  as  the  vanquished. 

*  40         The  sacrifices  of  labor  and  of  wealth  required  *  by 

the  mere  preparation  for  war  have  already  been 
noticed.  Those  sacrifices  are  increased  almost  beyond  cal- 
culation by  actual  hostility.  The  war  expenditures  of 
Great  Britain,  from  1793  to  1815,  are  estimated  at  $3,- 
200,000,000,  a  sum  of  which  the  mind  can  form  no  definite 
idea.  And  yet  before  we  can  arrive  at  the  whole  cost  of 
this  protracted  war,  we  must  add  to  this  sum  the  value  of 
the  time  lost,  and  of  the  property  destroyed  in  consequence 
of  the  contest.  It  should  also  be  recollected  that  the 
heaviest  burdens  of  war  are  imposed  at  a  time,  when  in 
consequence  of  the  interruption  of  commerce  and  of  regu- 
lar industry,  the  community  is  least  able  to  bear  them. 
But  the  pecuniary  sacrifices  demanded  by  war  are  far 
from  being  the  only  or  most  costly  offering  made  at  the 
altar  of  this  cruel  and  insatiable  demon.  He  requires  from 
his  votaries  a  surrender  not  merely  of  their  wealth  but 


WAR  AND  PEACE  27 

of  their  social  enjoyments  and  affections,  their  comforts, 
their  morals  and  their  lives.  He  who  could  witness  the 
anguish  of  parents,  wives  and  children,  caused  by  the 
mere  enlistment  of  an  army;  and  the  debasement  and  ruin 
of  thousands  of  ingenuous  and  promising  youths,  would 
have  before  him  a  more  vivid  and  heart  rending  pic- 
*  41  ture  of  the  evils  of  war  than  any  pencil  can  *  paint; 
and  yet  the  picture  would  be  incomplete  and  the 
colors  faint,  when  compared  with  the  accumulated  hor- 
rors of  a  single  campaign. 

Let  the  mind  dwell  for  a  few  moments  on  the  invasion 
of  Russia  by  Napoleon,  and  reflect  on  the  griefs,  the 
anxieties,  the  pangs  of  separation  endured  by  the  innu- 
merable families  from  which  were  gathered  the  vast  host 
composing  the  contending  armies;  let  it  watch  the  prog- 
ress of  the  war — the  toilsome  marches — the  carnage  of 
battle — the  conflagrations  of  Smolensko  and  Moscow — 
the  desolation  of  whole  provinces — the  famine  and  cold, 
and  agonizing  deaths  which  overwhelmed  the  retreating 
army;  let  it  imagine  the  wailings  of  multitudes  for  their 
slaughtered  relatives,  and  let  it  contemplate  the  fearful 
account  to  which  hundreds  of  thousands  of  immortal 
souls  were  untimely  summoned,  and  it  will  form  some 
idea  of  the  nature  and  extent  of  that  awful  retribution 
with  which  war  is  visited  by  the  Governor  of  the  uni- 
verse. And  let  it  be  remembered  that  this  retribution  as 
already  observed,  is  not  confined  to  the  defeated  party. 
Russia  was  victorious  over  her  invaders,  but  being  the 
seat  of  war,  the  amount  of  suffering  that  fell  to  her  share 
was  immensely  more  than  that  endured  by  her  enemy. 
The  French  army  was,  it  is  true,  nearly  annihilated, 
*  42  *  but  its  numbers  were  few  compared  with  the  Rus- 
sians who  perished  in  battle,  and  those  who  were 


28  WAR  AND  PEACE 

called  to  mourn  over  the  destruction  of  cities,  and  the 
devastation  of  provinces.* 

And  now  let  us  ask,  why  do  nations  voluntarily  expose 
themselves  to  such  calamities?  However  unworthy  may 
be  the  real  purpose,  the  only  one  which  respect  for  the 
moral  sense  of  mankind  will  permit  to  be  avowed,  is  the 
removal  of  some  present,  or  the  prevention  of  some  future 
evil.  Could  we  be  sure  that  the  means  we  use  would 
produce  the  desired  effect,  the  wisdom  of  employing  them 
would  still  depend  on  the  proportion  between  their  cost 
and  the  value  of  the  object  to  be  obtained.  But  war  is 
an  instrument  wholly  uncertain  in  its  operation,  and  fre- 
quently if  not  generally  exceeding  in  its  expense,  the  im- 
portance of  the  purpose  for  which  it  is  used. 

It  is  customary  for  nations  to  appeal  to  Heaven  for  the 
justice  of  their  cause.  Such  appeals  are  rarely  sincere, 
and  too  often  are  more  likely  to  repel  than  invite  divine 
assistance.  But  whether  sincere  or  not,  the  justice  of  the 
cause  affords  but  little  if  any  ground  for  anticipa- 
*  43  ting  *  the  favourable  interposition  of  Heaven.  Both 
sacred  and  profane  history  teach  us  that  base  and 
perfidious  men  have  often  waged  with  success  most  in- 
iquitous wars;  and  that  conquerors,  like  other  instruments 
of  wrath,  are  but  agents  in  executing  divine  judgments. 
Nations  are  all  in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  deserving  of 
punishment,  and  it  frequently  comports  with  the  provi- 
dence of  God  to  inflict  that  punishment  by  permitting  them 
to  be  the  prey  of  lawless  violence. 

If  then  the  result  of  war  is  wholly  independent  of  the 
justice  of  its  origin,  on  what  is  it  dependent?  To  this  the 
common  reply  is,  the  relative  strength  and  skill  of  the 
parties.  But  the  race  is  not  always  to  the  swift,  nor  the 

*  In  the  battle  of  Borodino,  the  killed  and  wounded  are  said  to 
have  been  75,000,  of  whom  45,000  were  Russians. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  29 

battle  to  the  strong.    A  powerful  nation  has  often  been 
foiled  in  its  attempts  upon  a  weak  one,  and  numerous  are 
the    instances    in    which    unexpected    revolutions    and 
alliances  have  turned  the  tide  of  war.    Indeed,  the  very 
existence  of  war  is  owing  to  the  uncertainty  of  its  result, 
for  it  is  obvious  that  if  success  could  be  distinctly  fore- 
seen, the  party  doomed  to  defeat  would  refuse  to  contend. 
The  folly  of  war  is  also  apparent  from  the  fact,  that 
the  object  for  which  it  is  waged  could  almost  always 

*  44     be  obtained  by  other  and  less  *  hazardous  means, 

and  that  when  obtained  it  is  rarely  worth  the  blood 
and  treasure  lavished  in  its  acquisition. 

Cicero  long  since  declared  "iniquissimam  pacem,  jus- 
tissimo  hello  antifero;"  and  the  sagacious  Franklin  re- 
marked— "Whatever  advantage  one  nation  would  obtain 
from  another,  it  would  be  cheaper  to  purchase  such  ad- 
vantage with  ready  money,  than  to  pay  the  expense  of 
acquiring  it  by  war;"  and  only  eight  days  after  this  illus- 
trious patriot  had  placed  his  name  to  the  treaty  of  peace, 
which  acknowledged  the  independence  of  his  country,  he 
wrote  to  a  friend,  "may  we  never  see  another  war,  for,  in 
my  opinion,  there  never  was  a  good  one,  nor  a  bad  peace." 
Both  reason  and  experience  bear  their  testimony  to  the 
correctness  of  these  sentiments.  The  chance  of  defeat, 
which  is  always  great,  of  course  lessens  the  value  of  the 
object  for  which  we  contend,  for  the  same  reason,  that 
when  the  result  of  a  lawsuit  is  doubtful,  a  prudent  man 
will  accept  a  compromise  rather  than  hazard  his  whole 
demand.  The  value  of  the  object  is  also  lessened  by  the 
prodigious  expense  at  which  alone  it  can  be  obtained. 
Let  us  test  these  principles  by  an  appeal  to  history. 

Great  Britain  claimed  the  right  of  raising  a  reve- 

*  45     nue  from  her  colonies  by  taxation,  and  made  *  war 

upon  them  for  the  purpose  of  collecting  this  revenue. 


30  WAR  AND  PEACE 

The  colonies,  on  the  other  hand,  took  arms  to  establish,  not 
their  independence  as  a  distinct  nation,  but  simply  their 
exemption  from  taxation  by  the  British  parliament,  in- 
stead of  their  own  colonial  legislatures.  To  human  view 
the  contest  was  unequal,  and  the  success  of  the  mother 
country  beyond  a  doubt.  Yet  in  her  attempt  to  extort  a 
few  thousand  pounds  from  her  feeble  and  defenceless  col- 
onies, she  drew  upon  herself  a  seven  years  war  in  which 
she  found  the  power  of  France,  Spain,  and  Holland, 
arrayed  against  her,  and  after  sacrificing,  as  is  estimated, 
200,000  of  her  subjects,  and  adding  £103,000,000  to  her 
national  debt,  she  was  compelled  to  purchase  peace  by  the 
severance  of  her  empire.  Had  she  condescended  to  limit 
her  demand  on  the  colonies,  and  to  offer  equivalent  privi- 
leges and  immunities,  her  blood  and  her  treasure  would 
have  been  spared,  and  her  power  would  have  been  aug- 
mented instead  of  being  impaired. 

But  it  may  be  said,  that  however  disastrous  may  have 
been  this  war  for  Great  Britain,  it  was  glorious  and  happy 
for  the  colonies.  Let  it  however  be  recollected  that  this 
glory  and  happiness  consisted,  not  in  exemption  from 

British  taxation,  the  sole  object  of  the  war  on  the 
*  46      *  part  of  the  colonies,  but  in  the  establishment  of  a 

great  confederated  republic,  an  incident  of  the  war, 
*47     a*  unwished  for  as  it  was  unexpected*     Had  *  the 

*  As  this  assertion  will  startle  many,  and  is  in  direct  contradiction 
to  the  annual  declarations  of  4th  of  July  orators,  and  others  who  are 
fond  of  representing  our  fathers  as  resorting  to  arms  for  the  purpose 
of  establishing  a  republic,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  correct  the  pre- 
vailing error  on  this  subject,  by  an  appeal  to  indisputable  authori- 
ties. 

The  Congress  of  1774,  specified  the  acts  of  Parliament  which 
infringed  upon  the  rights  of  the  colonies;  and  in  their  petition  to 
the  King,  after  setting  forth  their  grievances,  remarked,  "these  sen- 
timents are  extorted  from  hearts  that  would  much  more  willingly 
bleed  in  your  Majesty's  service — we  wish  not  a  diminution  of  the 
prerogative,  nor  do  we  solicit  the  grant  of  any  new  right  in  our 


WAR  AND  PEACE  31 

war  been  continued  by  the  colonies  as  it  commenced 
only  in  resistance  to  British  taxation,  and  had  the  peace 
of  1783  guaranteed  them  from  all  future  taxation  by  Par- 
liament, the  object  for  which  they  had  appealed  to  arms 
would  have  been  obtained,  and  we  may  fairly  ask,  if  they 

would  not  have  obtained  it  at  a  price  incalculably 
*  48  beyond  its  value?  Let  us  *  endeavour  to  form  some 

estimate  of  the  amount  of  taxation  which  the  colo- 
nies imposed  upon  themselves,  rather  than  pay  the  stamp 
and  other  duties  claimed  by  Great  Britain.  It  appears 
from  official  documents,  that  so  early  as  September,  1779, 
the  money  borrowed  by  Congress  for  carrying  on  the  war, 
independent  of  the  proceeds  of  taxes,  amounted  to  $197,- 

favor:  your  royal  authority  over  us,  and  our  connexion  with  Great 
Britain,  we  shall  always  carefully  and  zealously  endeavour  to  sup- 
port and  maintain." 

The  Congress  of  1775,  after  the  commencement  of  hostilities,  and 
the  capture  by  the  colonists  of  the  fortress  of  Ticonderoga,  ordered 
an  inventory  of  the  royal  stores  taken  in  the  fort  to  be  made,  in  order 
that  they  might  be  returned  "when  the  restoration  of  the  former 
harmony  between  Great  Britain  and  the  colonies,  so  ardently  wished 
for  by  the  latter,  should  render  it  prudent  and  consistent  with  the 
overruling  law  of  self  preservation." 

After  organizing  the  army,  and  making  every  preparation  for  war, 
Congress  published  a  declaration  in  which  they  affirm:  "We  mean 
not  to  dissolve  that  union  which  has  so  long  and  so  happily  subsisted 
between  us,  and  which  we  sincerely  wish  to  see  restored.  Necessity 
has  not  yet  driven  us  into  that  desperate  measure:  we  have  not 
raised  armies  with  ambitious  designs  of  separating  from  Great 
Britain  and  establishing  independent  states." 

But  the  pertinacity  of  the  British  ministry  prevented  the  colonists 
from  laying  down  their  arms,  and  they  soon  found  it  impossible  to 
use  them  with  efficiency  in  the  character  of  loyal  subjects,  and  hence 
the  necessity  which,  in  1776,  drove  them  into  the  "desperate  meas- 
ure" of  a  declaration  of  independence.  The  New- York  Convention, 
on  receiving  this  declaration,  resolved,  "that  while  we  lament  the 
cruel  necessity  which  has  rendered  this  measure  unavoidable,  we 
approve  the  same,  &c." 

Should  it  be  pretended  that  these  official  asseverations  were  hypo- 
critical, and  the  subterfuges  of  state  policy,  we  appeal  to  the  follow- 
ing individual  testimonies: 

"I  never  heard  in  any  conversation  from  any  person,  drunk  or 


32  WAR  AND  PEACE 

682,985;  other  and  large  loans,  it  is  well  known,  were  after- 
wards made  both  at  home  and  abroad.  If  to  the  amount 
expended  by  Congress,  we  add  the  contributions  of  the 
several  states,  and  the  losses  sustained  by  individuals,  we 
cannot  resist  the  conviction  that  the  mere  interest  of  the 
aggregate  sum  would  greatly  exceed  any  taxes  the  British 
ministry  had  ever  contemplated  imposing  upon  the  colo- 
nies. 

But  pecuniary  disbursements  formed  as  usual  but  a 
secondary  item  in  the  cost  of  the  war.  The  slaughter  of 
their  fellow  citizens*  the  capture  of  their  cities,  the  devas- 
tation of  large  portions  of  their  country,  together  with  the 
depreciation  of  morals  always  consequent  on  a  long  war, 

are  to  be  included  in  the  price  paid  by  our  fathers 
*  49  for  their  exemption  from  British  taxation.  *  And 

can  we  doubt  that  Britain  would  have  rejoiced  to 
have  sold  that  exemption  at  a  trifle  compared  with  what  we 
actually  paid  for  it?  And  what  an  accumulation  of  human 
misery  would  such  a  contract  have  prevented !  To  the  colo- 
nies it  would  have  secured  without  a  groan  all  the  indepen- 

sober,  the  least  expression  of  a  wish  for  separation,  or  a  hint  that 
such  a  thing  would  be  advantageous  to  America." 

Dr.  Franklin  in  1775. 

"During  the  course  of  my  life,  and  until  after  the  second  petition 
of  Congress  in  1775,  I  never  did  hear  any  American  express  a  wish 
for  the  independence  of  the  colonies."  John  Jay. 

"That  there  existed  a  general  desire  of  independence  of  the  crowii 
in  any  part  of  America  before  the  Revolution,  is  as  far  from  truth  as 
the  zenith  is  from  the  nadir. — For  my  own  part,  there  was  not  a 
moment  during  the  revolution,  when  I  would  not  have  given  every 
thing  I  possessed  for  a  restoration  to  the  state  of  things  before  the 
contest  began,  provided  we  could  have  had  a  sufficient  security  for 
its  continuance."  John  Adams. 

"Before  the  commencement  of  hostilities,  I  never  had  heard  a 
whisper  of  a  disposition  to  separate  from  Great  Britain;  and  after 
that,  its  possibility  was  contemplated  with  affliction  by  all." 

Thomas  Jefferson. 

*  The  militia  and  regular  troops  called  into  service  during  the 
revolutionary  war,  were  287,954  men. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  33 

dence  they  desired;  and  to  England,  and  to  Europe,  it 
would  have  saved  the  lives  and  happiness  of  multitudes. 
A  later  period  of  our  history  furnishes  a  still  more  strik- 
ing illustration  of  the  imprudence  of  resorting  to  war  as 
a  mode  of  redressing  injuries.  In  1812  the  United  States 
declared  war  against  Great  Britain,  on  account  of  certain 
orders  in  council  destructive  of  neutral  commerce;  and 
also  on  account  of  the  right  claimed  and  exercised  by 
Great  Britain  of  impressing  her  native  subjects  from  the 
merchant  vessels  of  other  nations  when  on  the  high  seas. 
The  obnoxious  orders  were  revoked  before  the  news  of 
the  war  reached  England,  and  the  contest  was  continued 

solely  on  account  of  impressment.* 
*  50         *  The  greatest  number  of  American  seamen  ever 

officially  alleged  to  have  been  compulsorily  serving 
in  the  British  Navy  was  about  800.  To  suppress  this  abuse, 
the  United  States  drew  the  sword,  and  formally  threw 
away  the  scabbard;  and  the  honor  of  the  republic  was 
pledged  again  and  again  to  rescue  her  seamen  from  this 
oppressive  claim  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain.f 

*  Immediately  on  the  receipt  in  America  of  the  intelligence  that 
the  orders  in  council  had  been  repealed,  the  British  commanders 
proposed  a  suspension  of  hostilities,  presuming  that  as  one  prominent 
cause  of  the  war  was  removed,  peace  might  be  restored.  But  the 
cabinet  of  Washington  would  listen  to  no  accommodation.  "As  a 
principal  object  of  the  war  is  to  obtain  redress  against  the  British 
practice  of  impressment,"  said  the  Secretary  of  State,  "an  agree- 
ment to  suspend  hostilities,  even  before  the  British  government  is 
heard  from  on  the  subject,  might  be  considered  a  relinquishment  of 
that  claim." — Am.  State  Papers,  vol.  8,  p.  333. 

f  "The  impressment  of  our  seamen,"  say  the  committee  of  for- 
eign relations  in  1813,  "being  deservedly  considered  a  principal 
cause  of  the  war,  the  war  ought  to  be  prosecuted  until  that  cause  is 
removed.  To  appeal  to  arms  in  defence  of  a  right,  and  to  lay  them 
down  again  without  securing  it  or  a  satisfactory  evidence  of  a  good 
disposition  in  the  opposite  party  to  secure  it,  would  be  considered  in 
no  other  light  than  a  relinquishment  of  it.  War  having  been  de- 
clared, and  the  case  of  impressment  being  necessarily  included  as 
one  of  the  most  important  causes,  it  is  evident  that  it  must  be 


34  WAR  AND  PEACE 

*51  To  secure  our  seamen  from  impressment,  the 

whole  country  was  subjected  for  about  three  years, 
to  the  burdens,  hazards,  and  vicissitudes  of  war.  Our 
commerce  was  swept  from  the  ocean,  our  citizens  op- 
pressed with  taxes,  the  villages  on  the  Canadian  frontier 
were  laid  in  ashes,  and  the  very  metropolis  of  the  republic 
captured,  and  its  public  edifices  fired  by  foreign  troops. 

Great  Britain,  who,  at  the  same  time  we  declared  war 
against  her,  was  engaged  in  a  mighty  struggle  with  the 
colossal  power  of  France,  found  herself,  by  the  overthrow 
of  Napoleon,  at  liberty  to  direct  her  fleets  and  armies 
exclusively  against  the  United  States.  Our  government, 
despairing  of  extorting  from  Great  Britain  a  relinquish- 
ment  of  the  obnoxious  claim,  and  foreseeing  only  an  accu- 
mulation of  calamities  from  an  obstinate  prosecution  of 
the  war,  wisely  directed  their  negotiators,  in  including  a 
treaty  of  peace,  to  "omit  any  stipulation  on  the  sub- 
*  52  ject  of  *  impressment."  The  instruction  was  obeyed, 
and  the  treaty,  which  once  more  restored  to  us  the 
blessings  of  peace  which  we  had  rashly  cast  away,  con- 
tained not  the  most  distant  allusion  to  the  subject  of  im- 

provided  for  in  the  pacification;  the  omission  of  it  in  a  treaty  of 
peace,  would  not  leave  it  on  its  former  ground;  it  would  in  effect 
be  an  absolute  relinquishment;  an  idea  at  which  the  feelings  of  every 
American  must  revolt." — A.  S.  Papers,  vol.  8,  p.  429. 

In  the  negotiations  for  peace  the  relinquishment  by  Great  Britain 
of  the  right  of  impressment  was  made  a  sine  qua  non.  "Your  first 
duty  will  be  to  conclude  a  peace  with  Great  Britain,  and  you  are 
authorized  to  do  it,  in  case  you  obtain  a  satisfactory  stipulation 
against  impressment,  one  which  shall  secure  under  our  flag  protection 
to  the  crew.  If  this  encroachment  of  Great  Britain  is  not  provided 
against,  the  United  States  have  appealed  to  arms  in  vain.  If  your 
efforts  to  accomplish  it  should  fail,  all  further  negotiations  will 
cease,  and  you  will  return  home  without  delay."  Instructions  to  Am. 
Commissioners. — Am.  S.  Papers,  vol.  8,  p.  577. 

In  a  subsequent  letter  of  instructions  it  is  intimated  to  the  com- 
missioners that  the  treaty  should  secure  wages  from  the  British 
government  to  all  American  impressed  seamen  who  shall  be  dis- 
charged under  the  treaty! 


WAR  AND  PEACE  35 

pressment,  nor  did  it  provide  for  the  surrender  of  a  single 
American  sailor  detained  in  the  service  of  the  British 
Navy,  and  thus,  by  the  confession  of  the  federal  govern- 
ment, "The  United  States  had  appealed  to  arms  in  VAIN." 
But  was  the  conduct  of  Great  Britain  more  consistent 
with  true  wisdom  than  that  of  their  assailants?  Although 
she  must  be  regarded  in  this  war  as  the  victorious  party, 
not  having  surrendered  the  claim  on  account  of  which 
it  was  waged;  yet,  at  what  an  immense  cost  did  she  avoid 
the  surrender?  To  retain  the  privilege  of  taking  from 
American  merchant  vessels  a  few  straggling  seamen,  she 
encountered  a  three  years  war  in  which  2,422  of  her 
vessels  were  captured  by  the  Americans;  more  vessels 
probably  than  all  the  seamen  she  had  ever  recovered  by 
impressment!  In  return  for  these  losses,  and  for  the  cost 
of  the  war,  and  the  consequent  additions  to  her  debt  and 
taxes,  she  retained  a  claim,  which,  for  the  last  twenty-six 
years,  she  has  not  found  it  necessary  to  enforce. 

The  last  fifty  years  have  been  fruitful  in  wars, 
*  53  *  and  also  in  proofs  of  their  exceeding  folly.  The 
impetuous  and  frantic  proceedings  of  the  French 
Legislative  Assembly,  struck  Europe  with  awe,  and  her 
monarchs  trembled  on  their  thrones  while  witnessing  the 
indignities  cast  upon  the  unfortunate  Louis.  It  was  sup- 
posed that  the  permanency  of  all  monarchical  governments 
was  involved  in  the  future  fortunes  of  the  French  king,  and 
hence  the  declaration  at  Pilnitz  (22d  August,  1 791 ),  by  which 
Austria  and  Prussia  virtually  invited  the  other  powers  of 
Europe,  to  unite  with  them  in  breaking  the  fetters  with 
which  the  French  people  had  bound  their  sovereign.  The 
invitation  not  being  accepted,  the  emperor  of  Austria  and 
the  king  of  Prussia,  resolved  to  hasten  alone  to  the  rescue 
of  their  royal  brother,  and  as  a  preliminary  step,  sub- 
mitted to  France  such  demands  as  plainly  intimated  an 


36  WAR  AND  PEACE 

intention  to  resort,  if  necessary,  to  force.  These  demands 
probably  hastened  the  fate  of  him  in  whose  behalf  they 
were  made.  They  were  answered  by  a  declaration  of 
war,  and  in  a  few  months  Louis  was  led  to  the  scaffold. 
The  allied  army  invaded  France,  and  were  soon  compelled 
to  retreat.  They  were  followed  by  the  enemy  who  spread 
dismay  through  Germany,  and  wrested  the  Netherlands 

from  the  sway  of  Austria. 

*  54  *  Great  Britain,  on  the  execution  of  Louis,  re- 
called her  ambassador  from  Paris,  and  refused  any 
longer  to  acknowledge  the  French  minister  at  her  court, 
and  was  preparing,  without  any  justifiable  cause,  to  join 
in  the  melee  when  her  intentions  were  anticipated  by  the 
energetic  leaders  of  the  new  republic.  An  English  army 
was  sent  to  the  continent,  and  driven  from  it  with  dis- 
grace. 

Prussia,  wearied  with  defeat,  sought  for  peace  and  ob- 
tained a  treaty  which,  instead  of  reestablishing  the 
French  monarchy,  transferred  to  the  regicides  a  portion 
of  her  own  dominions. 

Austria,  after  a  disastrous  war  of  six  years,  saw  a  vic- 
torious army  approaching  her  capital,  and  joyfully  ac- 
cepted peace  as  a  boon,  although  purchased  at  the  ex- 
pense of  the  Netherlands,  and  a  portion  of  her  Italian 
possessions. 

England,  deserted  by  her  allies,  continued  the  war  with 
an  obstinacy  that  no  experience  of  its  futility  could  shake* 
and  with  a  pride  that  disdained  to  inquire  for  what  object 
it  was  waged. 

France,  triumphant  over  every  enemy  accessible  to  her 
arms,  resolved,  in  her  wantonness  of  power,  to  plant  her 
standards  on  the  Pyramids,  and  without  condescending 
to  offer  an  excuse  for  assaulting  an  unoffending  people, 
already  looked  on  the  land  of  the  Pharaohs  as  an  ap- 


WAR  AND  PEACE  37 

*  55      *  pendage  of  the  great  republic.  On  the  10th  of  May, 

1798,  the  most  formidable  and  magnificent  arma- 
ment that  had  ever  been  equipped  on  the  French  shores 
took  its  departure  for  Egypt.  Within  three  months  that 
proud  fleet  had  been  captured,  and  the  army  it  trans- 
ported was  subsequently  returned  as  prisoners  in  the  ves- 
sels of  their  enemies. 

The  French  troops  having  taken  possession  of  the  papal 
territories,  the  king  of  Naples,  alarmed  by  the  proximity 
of  such  formidable  neighbors,  although  without  other 
cause  of  complaint,  thought  it  expedient,  for  the  security 
of  his  own  dominions,  to  throw  down  the  gauntlet  to  the 
French  republic.  In  a  few  months  he  found  himself  a 
fugitive,  and  his  kingdom  for  whose  safety  he  had  de- 
clared war,  in  the  entire  possession  of  his  enemies. 

The  growing  power  of  France,  which  had  been  aggran- 
dized by  every  effort  made  to  check  it,  now  excited  an 
alliance  against  it  between  Austria  and  Prussia.  During 
the  progress  of  this  new  war,  the  fortunate  soldier  who 
swayed  the  destinies  of  France,  proposed  peace  to  Great 
Britain.  That  nation,  safe  in  her  Island  fortress,  and 
guarded  by  her  wooden  walls,  had  little  to  fear  from  any 
continental  power.  But  seduced  by  the  meteor  of 

*  56     glory  *  she  preferred  war  to  peace,  and  her  people 

were  burthened  with  taxes,  not  merely  to  maintain 
her  own  armaments,  but  to  replenish  the  exhausted  coffers 
of  Austria.  That  rash  and  unfortunate  state,  weakened  and 
humiliated  by  successive  defeats,  at  last  closed  the  contest 
she  had  commenced  by  the  ignominious  treaty  of  Lune- 
ville.  Prussia,  likewise,  after  a  murderous  conflict,  con- 
cluded a  peace  which  gave  no  guarantee  whatever  of  her 
own  safety  or  that  of  others. 

England  was  thus  left  to  struggle  alone  with  her  gigantic 
foe.    The  war  she  had  provoked  and  prolonged,  contrib- 


38  WAR  AND  PEACE 

uted  nothing  to  her  prosperity  or  security;  and  had  in 
truth  no  real  object  but  the  gratification  of  her  national 
pride.  That  pride,  however,  was  at  length  compelled  to 
submit  to  the  inglorious  peace  of  Amiens,  by  which  En- 
gland obtained,  in  return  for  her  prodigal  expenditure  of 
blood  and  treasure,  Ceylon  in  the  East,  and  Trinidad  in 
the  West  Indies — possessions  which  would  have  been 
dearly  purchased  at  the  cost  of  one  year's  hostility. 

Such  was  the  result  of  ten  years'  war  waged  against  the 
French  republic,  not  to  resist  but  to  prevent  aggression. 
Had  the  powers  of  Europe  remained  simply  on  the  defen- 
sive, and  abstained  from  all  interference  with  the 
*  57  internal  dissen  *  sions  of  France,  order  would  soon 
have  succeeded  to  confusion,  either  through  the 
energy  of  some  successful  chieftain,  or  the  establishment 
of  a  regular  government.  But  the  attempts  made  to  coerce 
and  conquer  France,  armed  a  whole  nation  in  defence  of 
its  liberties,  and  created  that  military  enthusiasm  and  des- 
peration which,  like  a  volcanic  irruption,  burst  forth  with 
resistless  fury,  spreading  terror  and  desolation  in  its 
course. 

Never  had  the  precarious  issue  of  war  been  more  for- 
cibly taught  to  mankind,  but  it  was  a  lesson  unheeded  by 
Europe,  and  least  of  all  by  England.  Mortified  by  the 
failure  of  all  her  vast  efforts  to  limit  the  power  of  the 
new  republic,  confident  in  her  naval  superiority,  and 
trusting  to  her  pecuniary  resources  to  enlist  new  allies  in 
her  cause,  she  panted  to  renew  the  contest  from  which 
she  had  so  recently  retired.  When  a  war  is  desired  it  is 
rarely  difficult  to  find  pretexts  to  justify  it.  In  the  present 
instance,  however,  Britain  could  not  complain  of  any  in- 
fraction of  the  late  treaty,  as  it  had  been  violated  only 
by  herself.*  France  had  offered  her  no  violence,  nor  was 

*  By  the  refusal  to  surrender  Malta. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  39 

there  proof  that  any  was  intended.    She  was  there- 

*  58     fore  compelled  to  *  assume  the  attitude  of  champion 

and  protector  of  Europe,  and  scarcely  twelve 
months  after  the  peace  of  Amiens,  she  renewed  the  war 
against  France  avowedly  on  account  of  the  grasping  and 
inordinate  ambition  of  her  ruler,  as  manifested  in  his  re- 
cent encroachments  on  Switzerland  and  Piedmont!  But 
the  hostility  of  Great  Britain,  instead  of  curbing  the  ambi- 
tion of  Napoleon,  opened  new  paths  for  its  splendid  and 
adventurous  career,  and  the  petty  encroachments  which 
had  excited  her  alarm,  were  instantly  followed  by  the  oc- 
cupation of  Hanover,  the  patrimonial  possession  of  the 
house  of  Brunswick.  In  the  course  of  a  few  months  En- 
gland beheld  with  amazement  and  dismay  arrayed  on  the 
opposite  coast  a  numerous  force,  indicating,  in  the  name  it 
bore,  "Army  of  England,"  the  invasion  it  meditated.  The 
terror  inspired  by  this  army  is  evinced  by  the  preparations 
made  to  repel  it.  To  nearly  100,000  troops  of  the  line,  were 
added  80,000  disciplined  militia  and  about  300,000  volun- 
teers. "The  land,"  says  a  distinguished  historian,  "seemed 
converted  into  an  immense  camp,  and  the  whole  nation 
into  soldiers."  The  mere  expense  of  these  preparations 

must  far  have  exceeded  the  value  of  any  acquisi- 

*  59     tions  the  nation  could  ration  *  ally  have  anticipated 

from  the  war;  an  expense  incurred  by  its  own  wil- 
ful rejection  of  the  blessings  of  peace. 

The  war,  as  we  have  stated,  was  commenced  to  repress 
the  ambition  of  the  French  ruler,  and  in  less  than  one 
year  after  its  declaration,  that  ruler  had  exchanged  the 
truncheon  of  first  consul  for  the  imperial  sceptre. 

Soon  after  his  coronation,  Bonaparte  once  more  offered 
peace  to  England,  but  her  passion  for  war  led  her  not  only 
again  to  refuse  the  proffered  boon,  but  to  lavish  her  wealth 
in  rekindling  on  the  continent  the  flames  which  had  but 


40  WAR  AND  PEACE 

just  been  extinguished.  An  alliance  was  formed  between 
Great  Britain,  Austria,  and  Russia,  against  France.  This 
new  war  was  announced  by  Napoleon  to  his  senate  on 
the  22d  Sept.,  1805,  and  on  the  13th  Nov.  following  he 
entered  Vienna  in  triumph! 

The  Russians  hastened  to  the  succor  of  their  unfortunate 
ally,  and  on  the  2d  Dec.  the  battle  of  Austerlitz  dissolved 
the  confederacy,  and  in  a  few  days  after,  the  treaty  of 
Presburg  completed  the  humiliation  of  Austria,  by  de- 
priving her  of  more  than  a  million  of  square  miles  of 
territory,  and  two  and  a  half  millions  of  subjects. 
*  60  With  a  folly  bordering  on  insanity,  Prussia  *  now 
resolved  to  take  the  field  against  a  nation  of  whose 
energy  and  strength  she  had  just  witnessed  such  a  tremen- 
dous exhibition.  The  grievances  of  which  she  complained 
were  trivial  and  utterly  unworthy  the  risk  of  an  appeal 
to  arms.  On  the  1st  of  Oct.,  1806,  she  issued  her  declara- 
tion of  war,  and  the  campaign  immediately  commenced. 
After  gaining  some  advantages,  Bonaparte  offered  peace 
to  Prussia,  but  her  infatuated  monarch  did  not  deign  to 
return  an  answer,  and  on  the  13th  day  after  his  declara- 
tion of  war,  his  power  was  prostrated  in  the  battle  of 
Jena,  he  himself  was  a  fugitive,  and  his  capital  in  the 
occupation  of  the  very  enemy  he  had  just  defied. 

At  Berlin  the  French  emperor  issued  a  decree  which 
was  the  beginning  of  what  was  afterwards  called  the  con- 
tinental system;  by  which  all  commercial  intercourse 
between  Great  Britain  and  France,  and  her  allies,  was 
interdicted.  The  operation  of  this  system  occasioned  vast 
loss  and  distress  to  England,  and  greatly  aggravated  the 
sufferings  she  endured  from  this  unnecessary  war. 

The  Russians  had  advanced  to  the  support  of  Prus- 
sia, but  finding  their  ally  already  conquered,  immedi- 
ately retreated.  They  were  pursued  by  the  victor  and  a 


WAR  AND  PEACE  41 

*  61     series  of  murderous  *  conflicts  ensued  in  one  of 

which  50,000  human  beings  perished.  At  length  the 
treaty  of  Tilsit  gave  peace  to  Prussia  and  Russia,  and  con- 
verted them  from  allies  into  enemies  to  Great  Britain,  and 
supporters  of  the  continental  system. 

Thus  had  Britain  the  mortification  of  witnessing  the 
coalitions  her  subsidies  and  intrigues  had  raised  against 
France,  serving  only  to  swell  the  triumphs  and  augment 
the  power  of  her  rival.  She  had  renewed  the  war  to  res- 
cue Europe  from  the  grasping  ambition  of  the  first  consul, 
and  yet,  notwithstanding  all  her  mighty  efforts,  that  con- 
sul had  become  emperor  of  France,  and  his  brothers, 
kings  of  Holland,  Naples  and  Westphalia;  and  Austria, 
Prussia,  and  Russia,  had  enrolled  themselves  among  his 
allies.  Could  peace  have  rendered  France  more  power- 
ful, Europe  more  enslaved,  or  England  herself  more 
burthened  and  exposed? 

Soon  after  the  treaty  of  Tilsit,  France  and  Russia 
jointly  offered  peace  to  England,  consenting  to  leave  her 
in  possession  of  whatever  she  had  acquired  in  the  course 
of  the  war.  But  again  was  the  blessing  spurned,  not  be- 
cause the  rights  of  Britain  were  in  jeopardy,  but  because 
the  same  boon  was  not  also  tendered  to  Spain  and 

*  62     Sweden!  And  on  what  principle  of  duty,  *  on  what 

plea  of  state  expediency  can  the  continuance  of  the 
contest  by  Britain  under  such  circumstances  be  justified? 
Had  it  been  in  the  power  of  Britain  to  rescue  Spain  and 
Sweden  from  the  designs  of  their  enemies,  her  right  to  shed 
her  own  blood  in  defence  of  other  nations  might  well  be 
questioned.  The  result  of  her  former  efforts  as  the  cham- 
pion of  Europe  ought  to  have  taught  her  humility,  and  she 
was  doomed  soon  to  receive  another  lesson  not  more  grati- 
fying to  her  pride.  As  if  Providence  designed  to  rebuke 
her  arrogance,  only  a  few  months  elapsed  after  she  had 


42  WAR  AND  PEACE 

rejected  peace,  that  she  might  extend  her  protection  to 
Spain  and  Sweden,  before  Madrid  surrendered  to  the 
French  emperor;  an  English  army  was  ignominiously 
driven  from  the  Peninsula,*  and  Finland  wrested  from 
Sweden  became  a  province  of  Russia. 

The  infatuation  of  England  communicated  itself  to 
Austria.  To  that  power  France  had  given  no  cause  of 
complaint  since  the  treaty  of  Presberg,  but  had  faithfully 
observed  all  its  articles.  Still  Austria  found  in  the  ever 
increasing  power  of  Napoleon  a  pretext  for  renewing  hos- 
tilities against  him.  An  army  of  550,000  men 
*  63  *  flattered  Austria  with  a  glorious  issue  to  the  war 
she  commenced  on  the  9th  April,  1809.  In  thirty 
days  Vienna  was  once  more  in  possession  of  the  French, 
and  on  the  6th  July  the  battle  of  Wagram  placed  the 
house  of  Austria,  for  the  third  time,  at  the  mercy  of  Napo- 
leon; and  for  the  third  time  was  peace  purchased  by 
prodigious  sacrifices. 

Surely  this  brief  retrospect  of  the  wars  arising  from 
the  French  revolution  is  sufficient  to  humble  the  pride 
of  human  reason.  We  see  nations  voluntarily  rushing  to 
combat,  rejecting  peace  as  an  evil,  counting  war  as  a 
blessing,  spurning  the  lessons  of  experience,  and  again 
and  again  seeking  safety  and  power  in  the  same  paths 
which  had  repeatedly  led  them  to  defeat  and  spoliation. 
It  has  been  very  far  from  our  design  in  this  retrospect 
to  justify  the  conduct  of  the  great  conqueror  of  Europe. 
The  ends  he  pursued  and  the  means  he  employed  were 
generally  alike  unlawful,  but  the  impartial  inquirer  into 
his  history  will  be  compelled  to  admit  that,  for  very  many 
of  the  wars  waged  against  him,  he  had  given  no  other 
provocation  than  the  possession  of  great  power  and  inor- 
dinate ambition.  That  his  power  was  augmented  and  his 

*  Under  Sir  John  Moore. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  43 

ambition  indulged  by  the  very  assaults  of  his  enemies 
cannot  be  questioned;  and  unless  we  are  greatly 

*  64      *  deceived,  our  retrospect  forcibly  illustrates  the 

little  dependence  that  can  rationally  be  placed  on 
war  as  a  means  of  national  security. 

But  it  may  be  contended  that  the  successive  defeats  sus- 
tained by  Russia,  Prussia,  and  Austria,  were  owing  to 
their  inferiority  in  military  strength  and  skill  to  their 
enemy;  and  that  the  nation  that  can  bring  into  the  field 
the  most  numerous  and  best  appointed  army,  must  invari- 
ably be  successful.  Were  we  to  admit  the  truth  of  this 
assertion,  it  is,  nevertheless,  obvious,  that  unless  the  su- 
periority of  the  army  to  which  victory  is  destined  can  be 
previously  ascertained,  war  must  remain  undivested  of 
any  portion  of  its  uncertainty.  But  if  this  superiority  can 
be  discovered  before  the  contest  is  commenced,  how,  we 
may  ask,  are  we  to  account  for  the  fact  that  Austria,  Rus- 
sia, and  Prussia,  were  in  numerous  instances  so  grievously 
deceived?  The  wars  they  waged  against  France  were 
either  declared  or  invited  by  themselves,  and  they  must 
therefore  have  flattered  themselves  that  they  had  at  least 
an  even  chance  for  success.  All  history,  however,  and 
none  more  fully  than  that  of  Napoleon  himself,  bears  tes- 
timony to  the  great  and  instructive  truth  that  the  battle  is 
not  always  to  the  strong,  and  that  no  military  force 

*  65     or  skill  whatever,  can  enable  the  eye  of  man  *  to 

penetrate  the  future  and  distinctly  to  foresee  the  re- 
sult of  a  single  campaign.  Does  this  bold  assertion  excite 
the  smile  of  incredulity? — we  again  appeal  to  that  mighty 
captain  whose  astonishing  exploits  we  have  just  recapitu- 
dated. 

Napoleon,  on  taking  a  survey  of  Europe  after  his  last 
conquest  of  Austria,  beheld  the  whole  continent  courting 
his  alliance  and  protection,  with  the  single  exception  of 


44  WAR  AND  PEACE 

Spain,  in  which  the  arms  and  treasures  of  England  were 
employed  in  strengthening  a  popular  resistance  to  his  will. 
Bent  on  the  destruction  of  his  insular  foe  who,  inacces- 
sible to  his  armies,  was  both  indefatigable  and  implacable 
in  her  hostility,  he  determined  to  enforce  against  her  the 
continental  system  in  every  country  that  could  be  con- 
trolled by  his  power.  Russia  refused  to  submit  to  all  the 
restrictions  of  this  system,  and  he  sternly  resolved  to  com- 
pel obedience  to  his  mandate. 

The  preparations  for  this  war  by  France  exceeded  in 
effective  strength  any  the  world  had  ever  witnessed. 
Greater  numbers  may,  in  ancient  times,  have  assembled 
in  arms,  but  history  affords  no  reason  to  believe  that  any 
body  of  men  were  ever  summoned  to  the  field  possessed 
in  as  great  a  degree  of  the  constituents  of  military  power, 
as  the  army  now  collected  by  Napoleon.  The  gross 
*  66  amount  of  the  regu  *  lar  disciplined  force  of  the  em- 
pire, and  its  dependencies  and  allies  amounted  to 
the  almost  incredible  number  of  1,187,000.*  From  this 
mighty  mass  the  emperor  could  draw  at  pleasure  to  main- 
tain the  war;  and  he  selected  about  half  a  million  to  carry 
the  French  eagles  into  the  heart  of  Russia.  This  prodigious 
multitude  were  inured  to  arms,  and  accustomed  to  victory, 
and  were  commanded  not  by  a  Xerxes  or  Darius,  but  by 
one  of  the  most  energetic,  skilful,  and  fortunate  soldiers 
that  Europe  had  ever  known.  Could  military  superiority 
insure  success,  surely  Napoleon  was  justified  in  his  confi- 
dent anticipations  of  triumph:  and  yet  in  a  few  months 
this  mighty  monarch  was  seen  deserting  at  night  the  wreck 
of  his  army,  and  seeking  safety  in  flight  under  a  bor- 
rowed name!  The  sufferings  and  destruction  of  his  once 
proud  army  belong  to  history,  suffice  it  to  say  that  450,000 
perished. 

*  Scott's  Napoleon,  vol.  ii,  p.  318. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  45 

It  is  unnecessary  to  trace  further  the  progress  of  this 
memorable  war,  which,  it  is  well  known,  terminated  in 
the  entire  subjugation  and  humiliation  of  France,  and  in 
the  exile  and  captivity  of  her  late  powerful  emperor,  of 
*  67  whom  it  may  *  be  said  with  more  truth  than  of  the 
Swedish  hero — 

"He  left  a  name  at  which  the  world  grew  pale, 

To  point  a  moral,  or  adorn  a  tale." 

i 

Happy  would  it  be  for  mankind,  would  they  learn  the 
moral  which  the  name  of  Napoleon  so  strongly  enforces, 
that  military  power  cannot  confer  national  happiness  or 
security. 

We  have  already  noticed  the  pertinacity  with  which 
Great  Britain  prosecuted  the  war  against  France.  For 
this  protracted  contest  which  lasted  with  a  trifling  inter- 
mission from  1793  to  1815,  the  moralist  will,  with  diffi- 
culty, find  any  justifiable  motive;  or  the  considerate  states- 
man any  adequate  object.  The  private  grievances  of 
which  she  complained  were  utterly  insignificant,  and, 
indeed,  her  avowed  reason  for  refusing  so  often  the  prof- 
fers of  peace  was  the  necessity  of  preserving  the  balance 
of  power  in  Europe  by  raising  barriers  to  the  encroach- 
ments of  France.  Yet  no  dispassionate  investigator  of 
the  history  of  that  period  can  doubt  that  the  hostilities 
excited  by  England  on  the  continent,  were  the  chief  causes 
of  that  vast  accumulation  of  power  which  centred  in  the 

French  emperor.  To  attain  her  object  Great  Britain 
*  68  expended,  as  is  said,  the  sum  of  $3,200,000,000,  *  but 

it  was  spent  in  vain.  The  power  of  Napoleon  was, 
indeed,  checked  and  finally  destroyed,  but  not  by  the  arms 
of  England,  and  his  banishment  to  Elba  was  effected  al- 
most without  the  aid  of  a  British  musket. 

British  troops,  indeed,  caused  his  overthrow  at  Water- 


46  WAR  AND  PEACE 

loo,  but  had  there  not  been  a  British  soldier  on  the  conti- 
nent, there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  he  could  have 
retained  possession  of  a  throne  from  which  he  had  once 
been  driven,  and  which  was  no  longer  guarded  by  the 
affections  of  the  people  or  the  moral  influence  of  uninter- 
rupted victory. 

For  her  wanton  waste  of  human  life  and  happiness 
Great  Britain  is  now  suffering  a  severe  retribution.  The 
whole  nation  groans  beneath  a  load  of  debt  that  represses 
industry  and  has  filled  the  kingdom  with  murmuring  and 
sedition.  Institutions  which,  till  lately,  were  the  pride  of 
Britons,  are  now  tottering  to  their  fall,  and,  so  far  as  it  is 
permitted  to  human  ken  to  penetrate  the  future,  it  beholds 
the  shadows  of  an  approaching  and  portentous  revolu- 
tion. For  her  blood  poured  out  like  water,  for  the  millions 
wrung  from  her  people  and  lavished  in  subsidies  and 
military  equipments,  Great  Britain  has  received  no 
*  69  one  substantial  good;  and  the  *  vainglorious  privi- 
lege of  pronouncing  with  exultation  the  names  of  a 
few  victories,  is  her  only  reward  for  her  immense  sacri- 
fices, her  present  troubles,  and  her  gloomy  forebodings. 

But  we  may  be  told  that  however  foolish  and  criminal 
may  be  wars  of  ambition  and  conquest,  yet  that  national 
liberty  is  a  blessing  worth  every  sacrifice,  and  that  war 
is  often  indispensable  to  its  acquisition  and  protection. 
Could  liberty  be  always  attained  and  preserved  by  war, 
there  would  certainly  be  often  strong  inducement  to  wage 
it:  we  flatter  ourselves,  however,  that  we  have  already 
shown  that  the  result  of  war  is  precarious,  and  that  it 
often  disappoints  the  most  rational  expectations.  Would 
we  consult  the  records  of  history,  we  should  find  that  war 
has  proved  far  more  frequently  the  foe  than  the  friend 
of  freedom.  Rarely  have  usurpers  triumphed  over  the 
liberties  of  their  country  but  by  the  sword.  The  ancient 


WAR  AND  PEACE  47 

despotism  of  France  was  overthrown  by  representative 
assemblies  and  a  republic  established  on  its  ruins.  That 
republic  was  annihilated  by  an  adventurous  soldier 
through  the  agency  of  the  army  entrusted  to  him  for  its 
defence.  The  liberties  of  England  have  been  acquired 
not  by  force  of  arms,  but  by  the  energy  of  parliaments. 

The  ruin  of  almost  every  republic  that  has  been 
*  70      *  blotted  from  the  list  of  nations,  may  be  ascribed 

to  the  military  spirit  fostered  by  its  citizens. 
That  war  is  in  its  nature  adverse  to  political  freedom,  is 
not  a  discovery  of  modern  days.  A  Roman  statesman 
long  since  declared  that  laws  were  silent  in  the  midst  of 
arms,  and  the  experience  of  ages  has  converted  the  words 
into  a  proverb.  Civil  liberty  requires  the  substitution  of 
laws  for  the  will  of  the  ruler;  but  in  war,  the  will  of  the 
ruler  and  of  his  subordinates  becomes  the  source  of  legiti- 
mate authority.  Salus  populi  is  acknowledged  as  the 
suprema  lex;  and  the  bulwarks  erected  around  the  civil 
rights  of  the  citizen  are  all  levelled  on  the  proclamation 
of  martial  law. 

Innumerable  instances  might  be  cited  of  the  voluntary 

sacrifice  of  constitutional  liberty  to  the  policy  of 
*71      war,*  and  almost  every  campaign  *  produces  its 

dictator.    All  history  bears  testimony  to  the  natural 

*  Few  men  have  ever  been  more  jealous  of  encroachments  on  their 
rights  than  the  fathers  of  the  American  revolution,  yet  were  they 
frequently  induced  by  the  exigencies  of  the  contest  in  which  they 
were  engaged  to  submit  to  most  despotic  measures  and  to  entrust 
to  their  delegates  most  dangerous  powers.  At  one  period  of  the 
revolution  no  citizen  of  the  state  of  New- York  was  permitted  to 
pass  from  one  county  into  another  without  a  passport;  and  the  con- 
vention of  the  same  state  authorized  a  committee  of  three,  to  send 
for  persons  and  papers — to  call  out  detachments  of  the  militia — to 
apprehend,  imprison,  and  banish  whom  they  thought  proper — to 
impose  secrecy  on  those  they  employed — to  make  drafts  on  the 
treasury,  and  to  raise  officers  and  employ  as  they  pleased  220 
soldiers. 


48  WAR  AND  PEACE 

tendency  of  war  to  establish  and  strengthen  arbitrary 
power.  The  pride  and  pomp  of  war;  the  unlimited  power 
of  the  commander;  the  gradations  of  rank  and  the  blind 
mechanical  obedience  exacted  from  the  troops,  all  con- 
spire to  render  an  army  a  fit  instrument  of  tyranny. 

Happy  would  it  be  for  our  race,  could  it  be  said  of 
armies  as  of  persecutors  of  the  Christian  faith,  that  they 
can  only  kill  the  body,  and  after  that  have  no  more  that 
they  can  do.  Alas !  the  souls  as  well  as  bodies  of  men  are 
sacrificed  in  every  campaign.  The  acknowledged  demor- 
alizing effect  of  war  necessarily  results  from  the  great 
degree  in  which  those  engaged  in  it  are  withdrawn  from 
the  softening  influences  of  domestic  life,  and  from  relig- 
ious worship  and  instruction ;  as  well  as  from  the  stimulus 
given  by  hostilities  to  all  the  malignant  passions  of  our 
nature.  Familiarity  with  violence,  cruelty  and  death, 
tends  to  harden  the  heart  and  deprave  the  mind;  while 
the  irregular  administration  of  justice  amid  the  hazards 
and  tumult  of  war,  encourages  fraud  and  crime.  Surely 
no  one  who  has  examined  the  subject — who  has  listened 
to  the  testimony  of  history  and  observation,  will 
*  72  deny  that  in  the  long  and  gloomy  train  of  the  *  at- 
tendants on  war,  are  always  to  be  found  the  worm 
that  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  that  shall  never  be  quenched. 
In  the  policy  of  nations  no  maxim  is  more  universally 
received,  with  full  and  undoubting  confidence  in  its  truth, 
than  that  "to  preserve  peace  it  is  necessary  to  be  pre- 
pared for  war."  But  the  wisdom  of  man  is  foolishness 
with  God,  and  upon  few  maxims  of  worldly  wisdom  has 
Providence  more  indelibly  impressed  the  stamp  of  folly 
and  of  falsehood.  The  maxim  is  founded  in  ignorance  or 
forgetfulness  of  the  depravity  of  human  nature.  It  sup- 
poses that  aggression  will  be  prevented  by  the  power  to 
repel  it,  while  the  incitement  to  aggression  by  the  power 


WAR  AND  PEACE  49 

to  commit  it,  is  wholly  overlooked.  It  is  not  true  that 
military  preparation  prevents  assaults.  The  very  posses- 
sion of  power  provokes  envy,  jealousy,  and  hatred,  and 
thus  invites  hostility.  When  has  Europe  beheld  a  nation 
more  thoroughly  prepared  for  war  than  France  under 
Napoleon;  and  when  has  any  nation,  in  the  same  period 
of  time,  been  more  frequently  and  violently  attacked? 
History  affords  no  example  of  a  nation  so  powerful  as  to 
be  exempted  from  enemies.  On  the  other  hand,  great 
military  strength  has  certainly  no  tendency  to  encourage 
pacific  dispositions  in  its  possessor — while  the 
*73  *  nature  of  man  remains  unchanged,  his  cupidity, 
oppression  and  injustice,  will  ordinarily  be  propor- 
tioned to  his  means  of  indulging  them,  and  those  nations 
will  be  most  frequently  engaged  in  war  who  are  most  com- 
petent to  wage  it. 

From  the  commencement  of  the  18th  century  Great 
Britain,  France,  and  Russia,  have  been  the  most  formid- 
able powers  in  Europe,  while  Holland,  Denmark,  and 
Portugal,  have  ranked  among  the  minor  states.  From 
1700,  to  the  general  peace  in  1815,  these  countries  had 
been  engaged  in  war  as  follows,  viz: — 

Great  Britain   69  years. 

Russia    68     " 

France   63     " 

Holland   43     " 

Portugal    40     " 

Denmark  28     " 

This  statement,  however  humiliating  to  the  moral 
character  of  mankind,  affords  some  impressive  lessons. 
It  teaches  us  the  awful  prevalence  of  war,  and,  of  course, 
the  duty  of  Christians  to  labor  for  its  suppression;  and  it 
reveals  the  important  truth,  the  more  important  from  our 


50  WAR  AND  PEACE 

indisposition  to  believe  it,  that  in  the  righteous  retribution 

of  Providence  those  nations  which  most  cultivate  the  arts 

of  war,  are  made  to  drink  most  deeply  of  its  bloody 

*  74     cup.    *  From  this  statement  we  also  learn  the  folly 

of  the  opinion  which  has  been  current  in  all  ages, 
that  national  power  is  conducive  to  national  happiness.  To 
extend  the  limits  and  augment  the  resources  of  his  native 
country  has  ever  been  the  aspiration  of  the  patriot,  and 
a  nation's  gratitude  is  claimed  for  him,  who,  by  policy  or 
force,  adds  another  province  to  the  national  domain. 
The  importance  attached  by  statesmen  to  national  wealth, 
population  and  military  resources,  arises  from  the 
wretched  delusion  that  national  happiness  can  only  be 
insured  by  force  of  arms.  But  what  truth  can  be  more 
obvious  than  that  national  happiness  is  merely  the  aggre- 
gate happiness  of  individuals,  and  surely  the  happiness 
of  individuals  rests  on  other  grounds  than  the  revenues, 
fleets,  and  armies  of  the  government  to  which  they  are 
subject.  Military  power  has  no  necessary  connection 
with  the  general  diffusion  of  virtue,  education,  and  free- 
dom, the  elements  of  human  happiness;  it  is,  on  the  con- 
trary, but  too  often  the  instrument  of  a  barbarous  and 
debasing  despotism.  The  actual  amount  of  individual 
and  domestic  suffering  in  France  while  Napoleon  was 
arbiter  of  Europe,  was  probably  greater  than  under  any 

other  sovereign  who  had  ever  wielded  the  French 

*  75     sceptre;  and  who  can  *  doubt  for  a  moment,  that 

there  is  comparatively  more  comfort  and  less 
misery  in  the  diminutive  state  of  Connecticut,  than  in  the 
mighty  empire  of  Russia? 

The  last  plea  that  can  be  urged  in  behalf  of  war,  is  that 
it  is  indispensable  in  self-defense.  To  this  we  reply  that 
every  war  is  professedly  defensive,  while  scarcely  any  is 
so  in  fact.  It  will  be  difficult  to  specify  a  single  instance 


WAR  AND  PEACE  51 

in  which  a  war  might  not  have  been  averted  by  honest 
and  sincere  negotiation,  or  by  a  sacrifice  far  less  costly 
to  either  party  than  the  prosecution  of  hostilities.  Let 
it  be  remembered  that  precisely  the  same  plea  is  advanced 
in  vindication  of  duelling;  a  plea  we  all  know  to  be 
utterly  false.  War  is  national  duelling,  in  which  each 
party  is  exposed  to  calamities  incomparably  more  dread- 
ful than  the  grievances  they  are  seeking  [to]  redress. 

Surely,  the  facts  we  have  adduced,  confirm  the  truth 
of  Jefferson's  assertion,  that  "War  is  an  instrument  en- 
tirely inefficient  toward  redressing  wrongs — it  multiplies 
instead  of  indemnifying  losses." 

But  after  all  that  can  be  said  against  war,  and  after 
the  fullest  admission  of  its  folly,  cruelty,  and  wickedness, 
still  the  question  recurs,  how  can  it  be  prevented?  It 
*  76  would  be  *  an  impeachment  of  the  divine  economy 
to  suppose  that  an  evil  so  dreadful,  was  inseparably 
and  inevitably  connected  with  human  society.  We  are  in- 
formed by  divine  authority  that  wars  proceed  from  our 
lusts,  but  our  lusts,  although  natural  to  us,  are  not  un- 
conquerable. He  who  admits  the  free  agency  of  man, 
will  not  readily  allow  that  either  individuals  or  nations 
are  compelled  to  do  evil.  The  general  prevalence  of 
Christian  principles  must  necessarily  exterminate  wars, 
as  well  as  all  other  national  crimes,  and  hence  we  are 
informed  by  revelation,  that  when  righteousness  shall 
cover  the  earth,  "the  nations  shall  learn  war  no  more." 

And  are  we  to  wait,  it  will  be  inquired,  till  this  distant 
and  uncertain  period,  for  the  extinction  of  war?  We 
answer,  that  revelation  affords  us  no  ground  to  expect 
that  all  mankind  will  be  previously  governed  by  a  sense 
of  justice,  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  there  is  abundant 
reason  to  believe  that  the  regeneration  of  the  world  will 
be  a  gradual  and  progressive  work.  Civilization  and 


''~    T  ACKER'S  COL'EOE 
1A   ..A.Sy,n  r.D 


52  WAR  AND  PEACE 

Christianity  are  diffusing  their  influence  throughout  the 
globe,  mitigating  the  sufferings  and  multiplying  the  enjoy- 
ments of  the  human  family.   Free  institutions  are  taking 
the  place  of  feudal  oppressions;  education  is  pour- 

*  77     ing  its  light  upon  minds  hitherto  enveloped  *  in  all 

the  darkness  of  ignorance;  the  whole  system  of  slav- 
ery, both  personal  and  political,  is  undermined  by  public 
opinion,  and  must  soon  be  prostrated;  and  the  signs  of  the 
times  assure  us,  that  the  enormous  mass  of  crime  and 
wretchedness,  which  is  the  fruit  of  intemperance,  will  at 
no  very  remote  period  disappear  from  the  earth.  And  can 
it  be  possible  that  of  all  the  evils  under  which  humanity 
groans,  war  is  the  only  one  which  religion  and  civilization 
and  the  active  philanthropy  of  the  present  age  can  neither 
remove  nor  mitigate?  Such  an  opinion,  if  general,  would 
be  most  disastrous  to  the  world,  and  it  will  now  be  our 
endeavour  to  prove  that  it  is  utterly  groundless. 

Individuals  possess  the  same  natural  right  of  self- 
defence,  as  nations,  but  the  organization  of  civil  society 
renders  its  exercise,  except  in  very  extreme  cases,  unnec- 
essary, and  therefore  criminal.  A  citizen  is  injured  in 
his  person  or  property — were  he  to  attempt  to  redress  his 
wrong,  a  forcible  contest  would  ensue,  and  as  the  result 
would  be  uncertain,  the  injury  he  had  already  sustained 
might  be  greatly  aggravated.  Instead  therefore  of  resort- 
ing to  force,  he  appeals  to  the  laws.  His  complaint  is 
heard  by  an  impartial  tribunal,  his  wrongs  are  redressed, 
he  is  secured  from  farther  injury,  and  the  peace  of  society 
is  preserved. 

*  78         *  No  tribunal,  it  is  true,  exists  for  the  decision  of 

national  controversies;  but  it  does  not,  therefore, 
follow  that  none  can  be  established. 

We  have  often  seen  extensive  national  alliances  for  the 
prosecution  of  war,  and  no  sufficient  reason  can  be  as- 


WAR  AND  PEACE  53 

signed  why  such  alliances  might  not  also  be  formed  for 
the  preservation  of  peace.  It  is  obvious  that  war  might 
instantly  be  banished  from  Europe,  would  its  nations 
regard  themselves  as  members  of  one  great  society,  and, 
by  mutual  consent,  erect  a  court  for  the  trial  and  decision 
of  their  respective  differences.  But  such  an  agreement, 
we  are  told,  is  impossible.  That  the  immediate  or  early 
establishment  of  such  a  court  is  impossible,  we  are  not 
disposed  to  deny,  since  time  would  be  necessary  to  en- 
lighten and  direct  public  opinion,  and  produce  general 
acquiescence  in  the  plan,  as  well  as  to  arrange  the  various 
stipulations  and  guarantees  that  would  be  requisite.  It  is 
not  surprising  that  those  who  suppose  such  a  tribunal 
can  only  be  established  by  a  simultaneous  movement 
among  the  nations  who  are  to  continue  warring  with  each 
other  till  the  signal  is  given  for  universal  peace,  should 
be  startled  at  the  boldness  and  absurdity  of  the  project. 

Of  such  a  project  we  are  wholly  guiltless.  We  have 
*79  no  hope  or  expec  *  tation,  in  the  present  state  of  the 

world,  of  a  general  and  simultaneous  negotiation 
throughout  Christendom  in  behalf  of  a  tribunal  for  the  de- 
cision of  national  differences  and  the  suppression  of  war. 
Such  a  movement  can  only  be  expected  after  an  extensive 
although  partial  abandonment  of  the  military  policy;  and 
must  be  demanded  and  effected  by  the  pacific  sentiments 
of  mankind.  We  have  no  hesitation,  therefore,  in  avow- 
ing our  belief,  that,  under  existing  circumstances,  the  idea 
of  a  congress  of  nations  for  the  extinction  of  war,  is  utterly 
chimerical.  But  both  reason  and  experience  warrant  the 
hope  that  some  one  nation  may  set  an  example  which, 
through  the  blessing  of  Providence,  may  be  made  instru- 
mental in  ushering  in  the  reign  of  universal  peace. 

But  by  whom  and  in  what  manner,  it  will  be  asked,  is 
this  example  to  be  set?    It  may  be  a  feeling  of  national 


54  WAR  AND  PEACE 

vanity,  and  it  may  be  an  inference  from  the  peculiarities 
of  history,  position,  and  institutions,  that  leads  us  to  hope 
that  to  the  United  States  will  be  reserved  the  happiness 
and  glory  of  teaching  to  mankind  the  blessings  of  peace 
and  the  means  of  securing  them. 

The  American  government  was  the  first  to  prohibit  the 
slave  trade,  and  the  first  abolition  of  negro  slavery 

*  80     was  effected  in  our  Northern  *  states;  and  to  this 

country  justly  belongs  the  origin  of  the  temperance 
reformation.  The  local  situation  of  our  Republic,  and  the 
nature  of  her  foreign  relations,  seem  to  indicate  her  as  the 
first  of  the  nations  of  the  earth  by  whom  the  sword  is  to  be 
sheathed,  to  be  drawn  no  more.  No  nation  has  less  rea- 
son to  covet  the  possessions  of  others,  or  to  apprehend  the 
loss  of  her  own.  At  peace  with  all  the  world,  we  are  placed 
in  circumstances  peculiarly  favorable  for  the  experiment 
of  a  policy  avowedly  and  permanently  pacific.  At  the  same 
time,  our  widely  diffused  commerce,  our  extended  terri- 
tory, and  our  rapidly  increasing  population,  all  unite  in 
attracting  observation,  and  will  necessarily  give  to  the 
experiment,  if  successful,  a  powerful  influence  with  other 
nations. 

But  still  the  question  recurs,  how  is  the  experiment  to 
be  made?  Certainly,  in  the  way  least  likely  to  excite 
alarm  and  opposition.  In  every  effort  to  promote  the 
temporal  or  spiritual  welfare  of  mankind,  we  ought  to 
view  their  condition  as  it  really  is,  and  not  as  in  our 
opinion  it  ought  to  be — and  we  should  consult  expediency 
as  far  as  we  can  do  so,  without  compromising  principle. 
Wilberforce  and  his  associates  were,  from  the  first,  fully 
sensible  of  the  cruelty  and  injustice  of  West  India 

*  81      slavery,  yet  they  *  forbore  taking  any  measures  for 

its  removal  till  they  had  accomplished  the  abolition 
of  the  slave  trade;  being  well  assured  that  by  pursuing 


WAR  AND  PEACE  55 

both  objects  at  the  same  time,  they  would  excite  a  com- 
bined opposition  that  would  prove  insurmountable. 

Any  attempt  to  persuade  congress  to  abandon  all  mili- 
tary preparation,  to  disband  the  army,  to  sell  the  navy, 
to  raze  the  forts  which  protect  our  harbors,  and  to  pro- 
claim to  the  world  that  the  United  States  would  never 
again  take  arms  to  repel  invasion  or  to  enforce  their 
rights,  would  only  quicken  into  new  vigour  the  military 
prejudices  of  the  community.  Let  us  then  inquire 
whether  a  mode  for  preserving  peace  may  not  be  devised 
that  will  shock  no  prejudice,  and  excite  no  reasonable 
alarm. 

Of  all  the  nations  with  whom  we  have  relations,  none, 
perhaps,  enjoys  in  an  equal  degree  our  good  will  as  our 
first  and  ancient  ally.  Between  us  and  France  no  rivalry 
exists  in  commerce  or  manufactures;  and  we  perceive  at 
present  no  prospect  of  an  interruption  of  that  harmony 
which  has  so  long  marked  the  intercourse  of  the  two 
nations. 

Suppose  in  our  next  treaty  with  France  an  article  were 
inserted  of  the  following  import — "It  is  agreed  be- 
*  82  tween  the  contracting  parties  *  that  if,  unhappily, 
any  controversy  shall  hereafter  arise  between  them 
in  respect  to  the  true  meaning  and  intention  of  any  stipu- 
lation in  this  present  treaty,  or  in  respect  to  any  other  sub- 
ject, which  controversy  cannot  be  satisfactorily  adjusted 
by  negotiation,  neither  party  shall  resort  to  hostilities 
against  the  other;  but  the  matter  in  dispute  shall,  by  a 
special  convention,  be  submitted  to  the  arbitrament  of  one 
or  more  friendly  powers;  and  the  parties  hereby  agree  to 
abide  by  the  award  which  may  be  given  in  pursuance  of 
such  submission." 

To  what  well  founded  objection  could  such  a  stipula- 
tion be  subject?  It  is  true,  treaties  of  this  kind  have  been 


56  WAR  AND  PEACE 

but  of  rare  occurrence,  but  all  experience  is  in  their  favor. 
Vattel  remarks  (Law  of  Nations,  book  ii,  chap.  18),  "Ar- 
bitration is  a  method  very  reasonable,  very  conformable 
to  the  law  of  nature,  in  determining  differences  that  do 
not  directly  interest  the  safety  of  the  nation.  Though  the 
strict  right  may  be  mistaken  by  the  arbitrator,  it  is  still 
more  to  be  feared  that  it  will  be  overwhelmed  by  the  fate 
of  arms.  The  Swiss  have  had  the  precaution  in  all  their 
alliances  among  themselves,  and  even  in  those  they  have 
contracted  with  the  neighboring  powers,  to  agree  before- 
hand on  the  manner  in  which  their  disputes  were  to 

*  83     be  sub  *  mitted  to  arbitrators  in  case  they  could  not 

adjust  them  in  an  amicable  manner.  This  wise  pre- 
caution has  not  a  little  contributed  to  maintain  the  Hel- 
vetic Republic  in  that  flourishing  state  which  secures  its 
liberty  and  renders  it  respectable  throughout  Europe." 

But,  it  may  be  said,  one  nation  ought  not  to  permit 
another  to  sit  in  judgment  on  her  rights  and  claims.  Why 
not?  Will  the  decision  be  less  consistent  with  justice,  for 
being  impartial  and  disinterested?  It  is  a  maxim  con- 
firmed by  universal  experience,  that  no  man  should  be  a 
judge  in  his  own  cause,  and  are  nations  less  under  the 
influence  of  passion  and  interest  than  individuals — nay, 
are  they  not  less  under  the  control  of  moral  obligation? 
Treaties  have  often  been  violated  by  statesmen  who  would 
have  shrunk  from  similar  perfidy  in  their  private  con- 
tracts. Is  it  to  be  supposed  that  Sweden  or  Russia,  or  one 
of  the  South  American  Republics,  in  a  controversy  be- 
tween us  and  France,  without  the  slightest  bias  of  interest, 
and  with  the  observation  of  the  civilized  world  directed 
to  her  decision,  would  be  less  likely  to  pronounce  a  fair 
and  righteous  opinion  than  either  France  or  ourselves? 

But  we  can  decide  our  own  controversies.    That 

*  84     is,  we  can  go  to  war  and  take  our  chance  *  for  the 

result.  "It  is  an  error  (says  Vattel) ,  no  less  absurd 


WAR  AND  PEACE  57 

than  pernicious,  to  say  that  war  is  to  decide  controversies 
between  those  who,  as  is  the  case  of  nations,  acknowledge 
no  judge.  It  is  power  or  prudence,  rather  than  right,  that 
victory  usually  declares  for." 

The  United  States,  as  we  have  seen,  chose  to  decide  for 
herself  the  controversy  about  impressment  by  appealing 
to  the  sword.  In  this  appeal  they,  of  course,  placed  no 
reliance  on  the  reasonableness,  humanity,  and  justice  of 
their  demand,  since  such  considerations  could  have  no 
influence  on  the  fate  of  battle.  They  depended  solely  on 
their  capacity  to  inflict  more  injury  than  they  would 
receive,  and  this  balance  was  to  turn  the  scale  in  their 
favor.  But  it  so  happened  that  Great  Britain,  far  from 
offering  to  purchase  peace  by  relinquishing  the  practice  of 
impressment,  seemed  rather  disposed  to  continue  the  war, 
and  we  finally  thought  it  most  expedient  to  conclude  a 
treaty  having  no  reference  to  the  matter  in  dispute. 

Let  us  now  suppose  that  a  stipulation  similar  to  the  one 
we  have  proposed  with  France,  had,  in  1812,  existed  be- 
tween the  United  States  and  Great  Britain.  The  question 
of  impressment  would  then  have  been  submitted  to  one 
or  more  friendly  powers  in  something  like  the  following 

form: 
*  85         *  "Great  Britain  claims  the  right  of  taking  her  own 

seamen  in  time  of  war  out  of  neutral  merchant  ves- 
sels on  the  high  seas;  and  she  accords  a  similar  right  to  all 
other  nations.  The  United  States,  on  the  contrary,  claim 
that  their  flag  shall  protect  all  who  sail  under  it,  whether 
British  deserters  or  others;  and  they  further  object  to  the 
right  claimed  by  Great  Britain  on  account  of  the  abuses 
necessarily  connected  with  its  exercise  in  reference  to 
American  vessels,  in  consequence  of  the  great  similarity 
in  language  and  appearance  of  the  seamen  of  the  two 
nations,  whereby  American  seamen  are  frequently  im- 


58  WAR  AND  PEACE 

pressed  under  the  pretence,  whether  real  or  affected,  that 
they  are  British  subjects." 

It  is  scarcely  possible  that  the  umpires  could  have  given 
any  decision  on  this  question  so  injurious  to  either  party 
as  was  the  prosecution  of  the  war.  Had  the  claims  of 
Britain  been  confirmed,  some  American  seamen  would, 
no  doubt,  have  been  compelled  occasionally  to  serve  in 
the  British  navy;  but  as  the  British  government  claimed 
no  right  to  detain  such,  and  always  professed  their  readi- 
ness to  surrender  them  when  proved  to  be  Americans, 
the  abuse  would  not  probably  have  been  carried  to  a 
very  great  extent;  and  regulations  might  have  been 
*  86  made  to  lessen  if  not  prevent,  it  altoge  *  ther.  But, 
after  all,  how  small  would  be  the  number  of  such 
compared  with  the  thousands  who  perished  in  the  war; 
and  how  insignificant  their  sufferings  resulting  from  serv- 
ing on  board  a  British  instead  of  an  American  vessel,  when 
weighed  against  the  burdens,  the  slaughters,  the  conflagra- 
tions, inflicted  on  their  country  by  the  contest.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  decision  had  been  in  our  favor,  Great 
Britain  would  have  lost  a  few  seamen  from  her  marine,  but 
she  would  have  saved  the  lives  of  a  far  greater  number, 
and  she  would  have  saved  an  amount  of  treasure  which 
would  have  commanded  the  services  of  an  hundred  fold  as 
many  sailors  as  she  could  ever  hope  to  recover  by  im- 
pressment. 

It  is  not  probable  that  the  umpires  uninfluenced  by  pas- 
sion or  prejudice,  would  have  sanctioned,  without  qualifi- 
cation, the  claims  of  either  party.  Desirous  of  doing  jus- 
tice to  each  they  would  not  unlikely  have  regarded  the 
British  claim  as  warranted  by  the  maritime  law  of  Eu- 
rope, but  as  causing  in  its  exercise  injuries  to  the  United 
States  to  which  no  European  nation  was  exposed.  They 
would,  therefore,  have  endeavoured  to  compromise  the 


WAR  AND  PEACE  5 

conflicting  claims  by  requiring  Great  Britain  to  abstain 
from  impressing  any  seamen  whatever  from  Ameri- 

*  87      can  vessels.  On  the  other  hand,  *  as  a  compensation 

to  Great  Britain  for  relinquishing  her  right  in  defer- 
ence to  the  security  of  American  seamen,  they  might  have 
called  on  the  United  States  to  pay  to  Great  Britain  such  a 
sum  as,  upon  investigation,  might  be  deemed  a  full  equiva- 
lent for  the  services  of  such  of  her  sailors  as  might  enter 
the  American  marine. 

Such  an  award  would  not  have  been  acceptable  to  either 
party,  and  yet  it  would  have  promoted  the  interests  of 
both  far  more  than  the  war  which  they  fruitlessly  waged 
against  each  other. 

Indeed,  we  can  scarcely  anticipate  any  future  national 
difference  which  it  would  not  be  more  safe  and  prudent 
to  submit  to  arbitration,  than  to  the  chance  of  war.  How- 
ever just  may  be  our  cause,  however  united  our  people, 
we  cannot  foresee  the  issue  of  the  conflict,  nor  tell  what 
new  enemies  we  may  be  called  to  encounter,  what  sacri- 
fices to  bear,  what  concessions  to  make. 

We  have  already  partially  commenced  the  experiment 

of  arbitration  by  referring  three  of  our  disputes  to  as 

many  European  sovereigns.     A  question  relative  to  the 

interpretation  of  the  last  treaty  of  peace  with  Great  Britain 

was  referred  to  the  emperor  of  Russia,  and  decided 

*  88     in  our  favor.  The  king  of  the  Netherlands  *  made 

an  award  on  the  subject  of  the  boundary  line  be- 
tween us  and  Canada,  which  was,  in  fact,  a  compromise 
unauthorized  by  the  terms  of  submission,  and  satisfactory 
to  neither  party,  but  far  less  injurious  to  either  than  would 
have  been  one  month's  hostility.  A  war  with  Mexico  has 
lately  been  averted  by  a  reference  to  the  matters  in  dis- 
pute to  the  king  of  Prussia. 

France  also  has  sanctioned  the  principle  of  arbitration 


60  WAR  AND  PEACE 

in  her  treaty  of  peace  with  Mexico,  negociated  in  1839. 
Each  party  preferred  claims  against  the  other  for  alleged 
injuries,  and,  instead  of  continuing  the  war  for  the  en- 
forcement of  these  claims,  they  terminated  their  hostili- 
ties, and,  by  treaty,  agreed  to  refer  the  decision  of  these 
claims  to  "a  third  power,"  thus  giving  to  other  nations  a 
novel  and  most  salutary  example.* 

It  is  one  of  the  auspicious  signs  of  the  times,  that  the 
importance  of  adopting  some  plan  for  averting  war  is 
beginning  to  attract  the  attention  of  American  legislators. 

In  1838,  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts  passed  a  reso- 
lution declaring  it  to  be  "the  duty  of  all  civilized  com- 
munities to  unite  in  the  adoption  of  any  practicable 
*  89  plan  calculated  to  *  effect  so  noble  an  object  as  the 
abolition  of  war  and  the  preservation  of  peace 
among  the  nations  of  the  earth;"  and  they  expressed  the 
opinion  that  a  congress  of  nations  for  the  establishment 
of  a  tribunal  for  the  settlement  of  national  controversies, 
was  a  scheme  deserving  the  consideration  of  enlightened 
governments.  These  resolutions  were  directed  to  be  laid 
before  congress  and  the  several  state  legislatures. 

The  same  year  an  able  report  was  presented  to  the 
House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  by  the  com- 
mittee on  foreign  relations  on  the  subject  of  a  congress  of 
nations  for  the  suppression  of  war.  The  committee 
pointed  out  the  obstacles  in  the  way  of  such  a  congress, 
but  they  recommended  "a  reference  to  a  third  power  of 
all  such  controversies  as  can  safely  be  confided  to  any 
tribunal  unknown  to  the  constitution  of  our  country.  Such 
a  practice  (say  the  committee)  will  be  followed  by  other 
powers,  and  will  soon  grow  up  into  the  customary  law  of 
civilized  nations."f 

*  See  treaty  concluded  at  Vera  Cruz,  March,  1839. 
f  This   report  is  ascribed  to  Mr.   Legare,  the   chairman  of  the 
committee,  and  the  present  Attorney  General  of  the  United  States. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  61 

Notwithstanding   the   wisdom    and   humanity   of    the 
recommendation  of  the  committee,  there  is  too  much 

*  90     reason  to  fear  that  it  will  often  be  un  *  heeded  by 

the  parties  to  a  controversy,  after  their  feelings  have 
become  irritated  and  their  passions  inflamed.  Something 
more  than  a  recommendation  is  wanted  to  prevent  a 
national  dispute  from  terminating  in  a  national  conflict. 
No  plan  will  be  effectual  in  suppressing  war  that  does  not, 
in  time  of  peace  and  good  will,  anticipate  future  differ- 
ences, and  provide  for  their  accommodation.  The  plan  we 
propose  is  of  this  character,  and  its  practicability  arises 
from  its  extreme  simplicity. 

A  treaty  with  France  like  the  one  we  have  described, 
would  exert  an  influence  far  beyond  the  two  nations  im- 
mediately affected  by  it.  The  importance  of  the  United 
States  would  be  immediately  raised  in  the  estimation  of 
Europe,  because  it  would  be  seen  and  felt  that  whatever 
nation  might  enter  into  collision  with  us,  it  could  not 
expect  the  aid  of  France,  but  that,  under  all  circum- 
stances, we  should  continue  to  enjoy  the  friendship  and 
commerce  of  our  ancient  and  powerful  ally.  These  con- 
siderations would  not  be  without  their  effect  upon  En- 
gland. She  has  colonies  near  us  which  we  may  capture 
or  essentially  injure,  and  which  cannot  be  defended  by 
her  but  at  great  expense  and  inconvenience.  A  war  with 
us  must  ever  be  undesired  by  her,  since,  in  such  a 

*  91      contest,  she  has  much  to  lose  *  and  very  little  to 

gain.  Our  treaty  with  France  would,  moreover,  de- 
prive England  of  the  aid  of  the  only  nation  in  Europe  that 
could  afford  her  very  important  assistance  in  a  war  against 
us.  She  would,  therefore,  find  it  her  interest  to  avail  her- 
self of  a  similar  treaty,  and  thus  secure  to  herself  an  unin- 
terrupted and  lucrative  commerce,  and  protect  her  Cana- 
dian possessions  from  the  assaults  of  a  powerful  neighbor. 


62  WAR  AND  PEACE 

Once  assured  by  such  treaties  of  permanent  peace  with 
France  and  Britain,  we  should  find  our  alliance  courted 
by  the  other  powers  of  Europe,  who  would  not  readily 
consent  that  these  two  nations  should  alone  have  guar- 
anteed to  them  continued  peace  and  commerce  with  the 
United  States.  Hence,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they 
would  cheerfully  enter  into  similar  treaties  with  us.  Under 
such  circumstances  we  might  offer  to  our  South  American 
neighbors  the  same  stipulations  with  full  confidence  of 
their  cordial  acceptance. 

And  will  it  be  said  that  all  this  is  visionary  and  impos- 
sible?  Let  it  be  remembered,  the  plan  we  propose  violates 
no  principle  of  human  nature,  and  is  founded  not  on  any 
supposed  reformation  in  the  passions  and  propensities  of 
mankind,  but  upon  obvious  principles  of  national 
*  92      *  policy,  deduced  from  reason  and  experience,  and 
susceptible  of  the  plainest  demonstration.     It  is  a 
plan  adapted  to  the  existing  state  of  civilized  society,  and 
accommodated  to  the  passions  and  prejudices  by  which 
that  society  is  influenced.    It  is,  indeed,  perfectly  consis- 
tent with  the  precepts  of  Christianity,  but  it  is  also  in 
accordance  with  the  selfish  dictates  of  worldly  policy.    It 
interferes  with  no  military  preparations,  and  it  offends  no 
prejudice  of  the  most  ultra  advocate  of  pacific  principles. 
To  this  plan  we  can  imagine  only  one  plausible  objec- 
tion, which  is,  that  such  treaties  would  not  be  observed. 
It  is  readily  admitted  that  if  the  only  guarantee  for  their 
faithful  performance  consisted  in  the  virtue  and  integrity 
of  statesmen  and  politicians,  the  confidence  to  be  reposed 
in  them  would  be  but  faint.    Happily,  however,  we  have  a 
far  stronger  guarantee  in  national  interest,  and  in  public 
opinion.    Every  government  that  felt  disposed  to  violate 
such  a  treaty  would  be  conscious  that  by  doing  so  it 
would  be  sacrificing  substantial  interests  for  precarious 


WAR  AND  PEACE  63 

advantages;  exchanging  the  blessings  of  continued  peace 

for  the  hazards  and  calamities  of  war.    It  would,  indeed, 

require  some  very  powerful  temptation  to  induce  a  people 

to    forego    the    peace,    security,    and    exemption, 

*  93      *  from  military  burdens  conferred  by  such  a  treaty. 

Public  opinion,  moreover,  would  unite  with  self 
interest  in  preserving  these  treaties  inviolate.  A  govern- 
ment who,  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  war,  had  pledged 
its  faith  to  abide  by  the  award  of  umpires  would,  by  going 
to  war  in  defiance  of  that  award,  and  in  palpable  viola- 
tion of  its  solemn  engagements,  shock  the  moral  sense  of 
mankind,  and  would  probably  disgust  even  its  own  sub- 
jects. At  the  present  day  all  governments  are  more  or  less 
controlled  by  public  opinion;  and  the  progress  of  educa- 
tion and  the  power  of  the  press,  enables  every  individual 
to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  conduct  of  his  rulers.  Such  a  war 
would  be  odious,  because  it  would  be  felt  by  all  to  be  un- 
just and  dishonorable.  It  would  also  be  reprobated  by  the 
umpires,  whose  decision  would  thus  be  contemned,  and  by 
every  nation  which  had  entered  into  a  similar  treaty.  It 
ought,  also,  to  be  remembered  that  each  new  treaty  would 
tend  to  secure  the  observance  of  all  the  preceding  ones,  as 
each  nation  would  feel  that  the  value  of  its  own  treaty 
would  greatly  depend  on  the  faithful  performance  of  all 
the  others;  since,  if  one  were  violated  with  impunity,  the 

power  of  the  others  to  preserve  peace  would  neces- 

*  94     sarily  be  weakened.   In  short,  such  a  war  *  would 

most  probably  be  prevented  or  speedily  terminated 
by  the  interference  of  other  powers  interested  in  en- 
forcing treaties  for  the  preservation  of  peace. 

But,  surely,  it  would  be  the  height  of  folly  to  refuse 
entering  into  an  advantageous  treaty,  because  it  might 
possibly  be  violated.  What  profitable  commercial  treaty 
was  ever  rejected  on  this  ground?  Even  admitting  the 


64  WAR  AND  PEACE 

case  supposed,  our  local  situation,  our  population,  and 
resources,  relieve  us  from  all  danger  of  a  sudden  and 
hostile  attack.  No  future  enemy  of  the  United  States  will 
ever  indulge  the  idea  of  conquest,  and  the  only  serious 
consequences  we  could  apprehend  from  unexpected  hos- 
tilities, would  be  the  interruption  of  our  commerce,  while 
the  nation,  strengthened  in  all  its  resources  by  her  past 
exemption  from  war,  could  immediately  place  itself  in 
the  attitude  of  defence. 

Dismissing  then  all  idle  fears  that  these  treaties  hon- 
estly contracted,  and  obviously  conducive  to  the  highest 
interests  of  the  parties,  would  not  be  observed,  let  us  con- 
template the  rich  and  splendid  blessings  they  would  con- 
fer on  our  country.  Protected  from  hostile  violence  by 
a  moral  defence,  more  powerful  than  all  the  armies  and 

navies  of  Europe,  we  might,  indeed,  beat  our  swords 
*  95  into  ploughshares,  and  our  spears  *  into  pruning 

hooks.  The  millions  now  expended  in  our  military 
establishments  could  be  applied  to  objects  directly  minis- 
tering to  human  convenience  and  happiness.  Our  whole 
militia  system,  with  its  long  train  of  vices  and  its  vexa- 
tious interruptions  of  labor  would  be  swept  away.  The 
arts  of  peace  would  alone  be  cultivated,  and  would  yield 
comforts  and  enjoyments  in  a  profusion  and  perfection 
of  which  mankind  has  witnessed  no  parallel.  In  the  ex- 
pressive language  of  scripture,  our  citizens  would  each  "sit 
under  his  own  vine  and  under  his  own  fig  tree,  with  none 
to  make  him  afraid,"  and  our  peaceful  and  happy  re- 
public would  be  an  example  to  all  lands. 

It  is  impossible  that  a  scene  so  bright  and  lovely  should 
not  attract  the  admiration  and  attention  of  the  world.  The 
extension  of  education  in  Europe,  and  the  growing  free- 
dom of  her  institutions,  are  leading  her  population  to 
think,  and  to  express  their  thoughts.  The  governments 


WAR  AND  PEACE  65 

of  the  eastern  continent,  whatever  may  be  their  form,  are 
daily  becoming  more  and  more  sensitive  to  popular  opin- 
ion. The  people,  already  restive  under  their  burdens, 
would  soon  discover  that  those  burdens  would  be  reduced, 
if  not  wholly  removed,  by  the  adoption  of  the 

*  96     American  policy,  and  they  would  *  inquire  why  they 

were  denied  the  blessings  of  peace.  Before  long 
some  minor  states  would  commence  the  experiment,  and 
the  example  would  be  followed  by  others.  In  time  these 
treaties  would  be  merged  in  more  extensive  alliances,  and 
a  greater  number  of  umpires  would  be  selected;  nor  is  it 
the  vain  hope  of  idle  credulity  that  at  last  a  union  might 
be  formed  of  every  Christian  nation  for  guaranteeing  the 
peace  of  Christendom,  by  establishing  a  tribunal  for  the 
adjustment  of  national  differences,  and  by  preventing  all 
forcible  resistance  to  its  decrees. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  discuss  the  character  and  powers 
with  which  such  a  tribunal  should  be  invested.  Whenever 
it  shall  be  seriously  desired,  but  little  difficulty  will  be  ex- 
perienced in  placing  it  on  a  stable  and  satisfactory  basis. 
That  such  a  court,  formed  by  a  congress  of  nations  in 
obedience  to  the  general  wish,  would,  next  to  Christianity, 
be  the  richest  gift  ever  bestowed  by  Heaven  upon  a  suffer- 
ing world,  will  scarcery  be  questioned  by  any  who  have 
patiently  and  candidly  investigated  the  subject. 

But  many,  while  admitting  the  expediency  of  the  plan 

we  propose,  \vill  be  tempted  to  despair  of  its  adoption. 

That  many  and  formidable  difficulties  must  be  en- 

*  97     countered  in  inducing  *  this  or  any  other  govern- 

ment to  engage  to  submit  all  its  future  claims  and 
grievances  to  arbitration  cannot  be  denied.  But  similar 
difficulties  have  been  experienced  and  surmounted.  The 
abolition  of  the  slave  trade  and  the  suppression  of  intem- 
perance were  once  as  apparently  hopeless  as  the  cessation 


66  WAR  AND  PEACE 

of  war.  Let  us  then  once  more  recur,  for  instruction  and 
encouragement,  to  the  course  pursued  by  the  friends  of 
freedom  and  of  temperance.  Had  the  British  abolitionists 
employed  themselves  in  addressing  memorials  to  the  vari- 
ous courts  of  Europe,  soliciting  them  to  unite  in  a  general 
agreement  to  abandon  the  traffic,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  they  would  have  labored  in  vain,  and  spent  their 
strength  for  nought.  They  adopted  the  wiser  plan  of 
awakening  the  consciences,  and  informing  the  under- 
standings of  their  countrymen,  and  persuading  them  to  do 
justice  and  love  mercy;  and  thus  to  set  an  example  to  the 
rest  of  Europe,  infinitely  more  efficacious  than  all  the  ar- 
guments and  remonstrances  which  reason  and  eloquence 
could  dictate. 

In  vain  might  moralists  and  philanthropists  have  de- 
claimed for  ages  on  the  evils  of  drunkenness  had  no  tem- 
perance society  been  formed  till  all  mankind  were 
*  98  ready  to  adopt  a  *  pledge  of  total  abstinence.  The 
authors  of  the  temperance  reformation  did  not  lav- 
ish their  strength  and  resources  in  attempting  to  convince 
the  world,  but  they  commenced  at  home,  and,  forming 
themselves  into  a  temperance  society,  gave  a  visible  proof 
that  the  principle  they  recommended  was  both  practicable 
and  salutary.  And,  surely,  if  we  desire  to  convince  man- 
kind that  war  is  an  unnecessary  evil,  it  is  indispensable 
that  we  should  be  able  to  point  them  to  some  instance  in 
which  it  has  been  safely  dispensed  with;  nor  can  we  hope 
to  persuade  the  people  of  Europe  while  our  own  country- 
men remain  unaffected  by  our  facts  and  arguments. 

Here,  then,  must  be  the  field  of  our  labors,  and  let  those 
labors  be  quickened  by  the  reflection,  that  while  they  are 
aimed  at  the  happiness  of  the  human  race,  they  are  calcu- 
lated to  confer  on  our  beloved  country  a  moral  sublimity 
which  no  worldly  glory  can  approach. 


WAR  AND  PEACE  67 

But  what  means  shall  we  use  ?  The  same  by  which  the 
commerce  in  human  beings  was  abolished,  and  which  are 
now  driving  intemperance  from  the  earth — voluntary  as- 
sociations, the  pulpit,  and  the  press.  Let  the  friends  of 

peace  concentrate  their  exertions  in  peace  societies 
*  99  — let  the  ministers  of  the  Prince  of  peace  *  inculcate 

universal  love,  and  call  upon  their  hearers  to  engage 
in  this  blessed  work;  and  let  the  press  proclaim,  through- 
out the  length  and  breadth  of  the  land,  the  folly,  the  wick- 
edness, and  the  horrors  of  war;  and  let  it  call  on  the  people 
to  petition  their  rulers  to  secure,  by  treaty,  the  future 
peace  of  the  country.  In  the  first  treaty  that  shall  be 
formed  for  this  purpose  we  shall  behold  the  dawn  of  that 
glorious  day,  the  theme  of  prophets  and  the  aspiration  of 
saints,  when  "nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword  against  na- 
tion, neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more." 

The  present  age  is  propitious  to  the  enterprise.  It  is  an 
age  of  energy  and  of  freedom.  All  the  powers  of  mind 
are  in  full  activity,  and  every  eye  and  every  ear  is  open 
to  the  reception  of  new  truths.  Science  and  philanthropy 
are  daily  achieving  triumphs  which  the  past  century  dared 
not  imagine.  The  world  is  no  longer  governed  by  princes 
and  senates,  but  by  public  opinion.  Yet  this  despot  wields 
only  a  delegated  authority,  and  each  individual,  however 
humble,  can  enhance  or  diminish  his  power.  Who  then 
will  refuse  his  aid  to  enable  this  mighty  potentate  to  say 
to  the  troubled  nations,  peace,  be  still;  and  to  compel  the 

rulers  of  the  earth  to  stay  the  slaughter  of  their 
*  100  subjects  by  *  referring  their  disputes  to  another 

tribunal  than  the  sword? 

In  this  cause  every  man  can  labor,  and  it  is  a  cause  in 
which  interest  and  duty  call  upon  every  man  to  labor. 
But  it  is  a  cause  which  peculiarly  claims  the  zeal  and  devo- 
tion of  Christians.  They  are  the  servants  of  HIM  who  is 


68  WAR  AND  PEACE 

not  only  the  mighty  God,  the  everlasting  Father,  but  the 
PRINCE  OF  PEACE.  They  know  that  war  is  opposed  to  all  his 
attributes,  and  contradicts  the  precepts  of  his  word.  Con- 
science gives  her  sanction  to  the  means  we  have  proposed, 
and  prophecy  assures  us  of  the  accomplishment  of  the  ob- 
ject to  which  they  are  directed.  Why  then  will  not  Chris- 
tians use  the  talents  and  influence  given  them  from  above 
to  effect  this  blessed  consummation?  Let  them  not  plead 
in  excuse  for  listlessness  and  indifference,  that  it  is  God 
alone  who  "maketh  wars  to  cease  to  the  end  of  the  earth." 
In  the  moral  government  of  the  world,  the  purposes  of 
its  Almighty  ruler  are  accomplished  by  his  blessing  upon 
human  means.  He  has  promised  that  righteousness  shall 
cover  the  whole  earth,  and,  in  reliance  on  this  promise, 
his  servants  are  now  bearing  the  everlasting  gospel  to  all 
nations,  and  kindreds,  and  tongues,  and  people.  He  has 
has  also  promised  that  nations  shall  learn  war  no 
*  101  *  more,  and,  in  his  faithfulness,  we  have  all  the  in- 
centive which  certainty  of  ultimate  success  can  give 
to  human  exertion.  And  in  what  cause  can  the  energies  of 
Christian  benevolence  be  more  appropriately  exercised? 
To  arrest  the  practice  of  war  is  to  stop  the  effusion  of  hu- 
man blood,  and  the  commission  of  innumerable  crimes 
and  atrocities — it  is  to  diffuse  peace,  and  comfort,  and 
happiness,  through  the  great  family  of  man — it  is  to  foster 
the  arts  and  sciences  which  minister  to  the  wants  of  so- 
ciety— it  is  to  check  the  progress  of  vice — to  speed  the  ad- 
vance of  the  gospel — to  rescue  immortal  souls  from  end- 
less misery,  and  to  secure  to  multitudes  of  our  fellow  men 
a  felicity  as  durable  as  it  is  inconceivable. 

For  him  who,  in  faith  and  zeal,  labors  in  this  great  and 
holy  cause,  a  rich  reward  is  reserved.  While  doing  good 
to  others  he  is  himself  a  participator  in  the  blessing  he 
bestows.  The  very  exercise  of  his  benevolent  affections 


WAR  AND  PEACE  69 

affords  a  pure  and  exquisite  delight,  and  when  he  enters 
the  world  of  peace  and  love,  he  shall  experience  the  full 
import  of  those  cheering  but  mysterious  words,  "Blessed 
are  the  peacemakers,  for  they  shall  be  called  the  children 
of  God." 


HOUR 


JX 
1 949 

DATE 


^R  6^146 


i 


REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A     001  071  029     1 


